Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: Groundloop on January 06, 2010, 06:21:24 PM
-
Hi All,
I have started this new thread to discuss a solid state Orbo version.
I have build one version, not perfect in any way, but it seems to work.
I think magnetic shielding is important to consider when making free energy.
I use three Toroids (the one that is on power cables) with the size as in the attached drawing.
I threaded two of them with 4 wires in parallel 0,2 mm enameled copper wire. Did put as many
turns as I could on the cores, approx. 90 turns. I then epoxied the two toroids to the third
ferrite core. Did use two plastic rings to keep the generator coil in place. The generator coil
is wound approx. 200 turns with 1 mm enameled copper wire. The mostfet switch is
the Rosmary Anslie switch found in another thread in this forum. I have three pot-meters
to adjust frequency, duty cycle and mosfet gate trigger resistance.
I now can confirm that the energy created in the generator coil of my solid state
is real and useful. I have done a test and used the output to charge another
lead acid battery. I collected the high voltage output in a capacitor and when the
voltage in the capacitor reached approx. 220 volt, then I just discharged the
capacitor into the battery with a SCR triggered from a Neon bulb. When the
high voltage from the capacitor meets the low resistance of the lead acid battery,
then the voltage is "converted" to current in the battery, thus making the ions
move and ultimately charging the battery. I can not claim that my first crude
and simple setup is over unity. But I hope that future versions is better tuned
with better toroids etc. I have also learned that the generator coil must be
a high turn (thin wire) coil so that we generate a LOT of voltage with almost no
current. It looks like this method of generating power need voltage, not current.
I know this because I was WRONG about the fast switch on time regarding the
difference between hexfets and regular transistors. I found that in my first transistor
trial run I have used a diode across the coil to protect the transistor from high
voltage spikes. This WAS a mistake and killed the output voltage. When I removed
the diode and put it across the transistor collector and emitter instead, then I
got the same high voltage effect as with a hexfet. So I was wrong.
I think this solid state shows a great potential for more research. There are numerous
ways to improve the circuit. One way is to make it bigger. The bottom line is that
the system works and the only way it CAN work is by magnetic shielding by the
toroids at each end of the center core.
Did test this:
Without magnets = zero (or very close to zero volt) in generator coil.
With ONE magnet at one end = 1/2 the voltage (approx.) as with 2 magnets.
Tried both ends, same result. Did try both polarities, north and south, same result.
With two magnets attracting each other = high voltage on output.
Did try both NS and SN, same result at each ends.
With two magnets PUSHING at each other at both ends, zero volt at output.
Did try NN and SS and zero volt in both cases.
With TWO magnets NS and adjusting the distance to toroid with paper shims,
then I got even higher volt for the particular switch setting and frequency.
So there IS a relationship between magnet strength AND the power you put
into the toroids.
Groundloop
-
Hi All,
I have started this new thread to discuss a solid state Orbo version.
I have build one version, not perfect in any way, but it seems to work.
I think magnetic shielding is importaint to consider when making free energy.
I will post the drawings and circuits here soon.
Groundloop
Great, look forward to your work!!
Ben
-
All,
Build the switch with the component values as shown in the attached
drawing. The three pot-meters must be external to the PCB for easy adjustment.
You can use almost ANY hexfet transistor as long as it is a HIGH VOLTAGE type.
You can also use a HIGH VOLTAGE bipolar transistor as shown in my drawing.
If you choose to use a high voltage bipolar npn power transistor, then you MUST
use a diode across collector and emitter as show in the drawing. If you use a
high voltage N-Type power HEXFET then the diode can be omitted since
the hexfet already has a internal diode. This is step one.
Step two. Find three ferrite TUBES that normally is used as RFI shielding around
mains cables. Remove the plastic covering around the Ferrite tubes. Now wind two
of the Ferrite tubes with as much copper wire you can get onto the core. Go back
to page 60 in this thread, post 891, and check what copper wire I used. Use the
same wire thickness and number of wires.
Step three. Find an old used and empty solder tin plastic spool. Cut off the top
and bottom of the spool, leaving a few mm of the center tubing on each top
and bottom. Epoxy one plate at each end of the third Ferrite core tube. Next,
epoxy one toroid tube (ready winded with copper wire) to each end of the plates.
You then get a setup as shown on page 59, post 874.
Step four. Now wind the generator coil with 0,5 mm wire as many turns as you
have room for between the two plastic plates. Secure with tape when done.
Step five. Solder two ends from the outer toroid cores together. The two remaining
ends connects to the RA switch output connector. Look at the attached drawing.
Connect power to the unit and try out different magnets. Adjust for best output
voltage by using paper shims between magnets and toroid cores. No need to use
the biggest Neo magnets you have. Try finding the magnets that is strong enough
for you toroids.
-
I have high hopes for this device. Keep on going Alex!
Have you yet to test the steel horseshoe connecting the back of all magnets and increasing the flux? I think that this might work and could be huge in showing more power generated on the generator coil.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Ben, Bruce,
Thanks. :-)
I will continue my work in here. That way we do not have to clutter up the other thread.
I have not tested the flux bar from magnet to magnet yet. But I do not think it is needed.
My research shows me that if the magnet field is too strong then I need a huge current
going in the toroids to block that field. There is a balance between magnetic field and
the power needed in the toroids.
Alex.
-
Ben, Bruce,
Thanks. :-)
I will continue my work in here. That way we do not have to clutter up the other thread.
I have not tested the flux bar from magnet to magnet yet. But I do not think it is needed.
My research shows me that if the magnet field is too strong then I need a huge current
going in the toroids to block that field. There is a balance between magnetic field and
the power needed in the toroids.
Alex.
Could you not build some sort of switching device that will only allow the steel from one side to the other to connect ONLY when there is no power to the toroids? This would be like a flux booster and yet when the toroid is turned on and is in "blocking mode", it is only having to block the same flux it is blocking now. Just a weird idea, I know... but that is me! LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Everything is possible. I have tried to explain the problem with
too strong magnets on the toroids. There is a limit to the toroid
cores ability to shield the magnetic field. If the field is too strong
and if we already are powering the toroid cores to the saturation
point, then all power increase after that point is wasted as heat.
A cross bar at the magnets will make the field so strong that there
is not enough magnetic shielding left in the cores to overcome this.
Alex.
-
That's the spirit - congratulate Alex - will be really sad that you didn't continue sharing you excellent work.
Cheers,
Dragan
-
@oscar,
>>when you wind your next generator coil, maybe you can put a centre-tap in it.
>>Then you may want to test this arrangement again:
>>Maybe you will get "two outputs" with the centre tapped generator coil.
>>measuring between each end of the generator coil and it's centre.
I have tested the NN and SS magnets arrangement on my toroid ends.
I measured zero (or very close to zero) voltage between the generator coil
ends and also between the center taps and the ends.
Alex.
-
@dradak1,
Thanks.
I think it is important to also research the magnetic shielding effect.
Any more builders on this system?
Alex.
-
Hi Groundloop,
thanks for doing the test I suggested. Unfortunately it did not give positive results.
Naturally my idea has only got a chance to work, if your generator coil consists more or less of two separate halves along the length of the ferrite rod, so that each one of these halves is covering half the ferrite rod. The right half coil is not allowed to overlap into the left half of the rod and vice versa. Both halves have to meet in the middle of the rod and this is where the centre tap must be. In the geometric middle, where the fields of the two magnets meet.
Maybe it would be best if you can shift/slide the coil(s) a little to tune.
However, I am not sure if it would work even if the above criteria is met. It is just an idea. I write this just to clarify my idea.
But please confirm: Your centre tap is surely in the middle of the length of the coil, but not in the geometric middle of the rod (which would be necessary, according to my reasoning)?
-
Bruce,
Everything is possible. I have tried to explain the problem with
too strong magnets on the toroids. There is a limit to the toroid
cores ability to shield the magnetic field. If the field is too strong
and if we already are powering the toroid cores to the saturation
point, then all power increase after that point is wasted as heat.
A cross bar at the magnets will make the field so strong that there
is not enough magnetic shielding left in the cores to overcome this.
Alex.
Yep, I understand that completely. But... what I am talking about is having some sort of switching device, that only allows the steel to "connect" when the toroid is in the "off" mode. That is when we want the most flux to pass to the generator coil. And then, when the toroid is "on" and blocking the flux,the "switch" connecting the steel would be "off", thus the only flux it would be blocking is that of the normal magnets that you now have on there. I do not know what sort of switch could be used, but someone might have an idea. I have attached a picture. I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but if a way could be figured out, it would give a real boost on the genrator coils, I believe!
Cheers,
Brce
-
Oscar,
The center tap is in the middle of the generator coil not in the middle of the
center Ferrite tube. I can not move the toroids. They are epoxied to the
center Ferrite tube.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
I understand what you are saying. And it may work. The only magnetic switch
that I'm aware of is another toroid at the crossbar. This toroid must be saturated
enough so that we block the crossbar magnetic field when we fire the two other
toroid. Will this increased power usage "eat up" the gain we get? That is the question.
One way of doing it is maybe using two rotors, one at each end of the system, but
then we do have an solid state anymore. Your idea is good but difficult to implement.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Take a look at the attached drawing. In this setup we use two toroid cores at each end.
Then we use a magnetic crossbar at each ends of the magnets. Now, when the toroids
are off then the magnetic field will take the shortest route in a closed magnetic field
at both ends.
Now we switch on the two top toroids. The magnetic field will now go through the center
core instead because that will be the lowest resistance for the field. We switch off again and
now we switch on the other two toroids. Now the magnetic field will travel through the core
in the opposite direction. We switch off again, and then repeat the sequence. This will create
an alternating magnetic field in the core and we will have a lot more power out in the generator
coil.
Is there anybody that have the FEMM simulator that can try this setup?
(Or other magnetic simulator that can simulate this setup.)
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Take a look at the attached drawing. In this setup we use two toroid cores at each end.
Then we use a magnetic crossbar at each ends of the magnets. Now, when the toroids
are off then the magnetic field will take the shortest route in a closed magnetic field
at both ends.
Now we switch on the two top toroids. The magnetic field will now go through the center
core instead because that will be the lowest resistance for the field. We switch off again and
now we switch on the other two toroids. Now the magnetic field will travel through the core
in the opposite direction. We switch off again, and then repeat the sequence. This will create
an alternating magnetic field in the core and we will have a lot more power out in the generator
coil.
Is there anybody that have the FEMM simulator that can try this setup?
(Or other magnetic simulator that can simulate this setup.)
Alex.
Alex,
I LIKE that idea...a lot! I think it will indeed increase the output.
Do you have the means to test it?
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Yes, but not right now. I have to order more enameled copper wire first.
So it will take some time. I hope that some other member can do me a
magnetic simulation before I build this stuff. A magnetic simulation will
give value information.
Alex.
-
Groundloop
I'm building the circuit right now as a test before I get the PCB from gotoluc (Thanks Luc!!!). I'm hoping that the transistor used can be substituted for a NTE284 (bipolar npn). I'll let everyone know if I let the smoke out of it. I've had to make a couple of diode substitutions. For D5, I'm using a 1N4007 and for D1/D2 a 1N4002. I hope they will work out. Someone let me know if they will not work.
It's going to take a day or two for me to find some toroids and wind them. I probably need more wire too. I have an old pc power supply that has some toroids in the them, but not the size specified. They will probably work, I'll just have to adjust the magnetic field and windings a bit.
Back to the grind....
-
@Staffman,
It is great that you will build this also. More people testing will get faster results.
May I recommend that you hunt for the Ferrite tubes that you will find on mains
cables to switch mode power supply (laptop supply etc.) They are great for
the generator coil. You need a little length so that the generator coil can hold
some wire.
The inductive voltage kick back can be brutal when you switch the
toroid coils. The NTE284 is only rated 180 volt. If you can find ANY NPN type
transistor rated 800 volt or more then you will be safe. You can also use a mosfet
rated for high voltage. Go for the above 500 volt N-Type mosfet. My recommended
type for the PCB is the IRF PF50 (TO247 size).
The diodes in the 555 switch is NOT critical at all. You can use whatever type you have. 1N4000,
up to 1N4007, 1N4148 etc. will do fine.
But if you use a bipolar NPN transistor to do the switching then you need
to use the 1000 volt 1N4007 across the collector and emitter. If you use a high voltage
mosfet then you can omit that diode because the mosfet already has an built in diode.
Groundloop.
-
Groundloop,
and all
I will not explain that I do not have a lot of knowledge, but
My thinking is, why spend energy for shielding magnets, if you can (energy) used to generate the magnetic field (electromagnet).
excuse my ignorance, but what would be the energy consumption if it were on both sides of the electromagnet of the generator, instead of magnets which must be shielding.
and the question of whether the same effect?
sorry again, but I realized it when I read this topic that can be a kind of link or similar principle as in the MEG generator.
tommorow I`ll give a shot and try to replicate groundloop`s generator in my garage, I`ll just use coils and magnets from my "orbo wheel" (it`s past midnght here)
sorry to my english (I never learned in school) but I vrote this text with help of google translate.
regards, Tadej
-
Groundloop thanks for the help. Much appreciated!!! Ordering the N-Type you mentioned and will also order P-Type for below....
Is there a way you could test to see what the back spike voltage is? We may be able to capture that back spike into a cap bank for added efficiency. Just a forward looking thought.
-
Tadej,
Welcome to this forum. It is always nice to get more people interested in free energy research.
I will try to answer your question. First, why use magnetic shielding instead of ordinary coils.
The short answer would be, I have already built the Tom Barden MEG and it did not work for me.
So I want to try something new instead. When we use magnetic shielding then all the power we
get in the generator coil is for free, according to the theories from Steorn. So if we can use LESS
power in the toroids to shield the magnetic field than the power we get out of the generator coil,
then we will have free energy. Probably not an easy task to do but worth trying.
Your English is not a problem, I can understand you quite fine.
Again, welcome, and good luck with your build.
Alex.
-
@Staffman,
I can measure the voltage tomorrow afternoon. It is past midnight here and bedtime.
We can NOT capture that high voltage. I have (accidental) tried that and the output in
the generator coil drops to almost nothing. We must allow the positive voltage spike to
be big. The negative voltage spike will be channeled to ground via the BY255 diode or
if a mosfet is used, through the internal diode.
Alex.
-
@ all
Just built the Anslie circuit, all except the Transistor (just ordered IRFPF50 from Mouser). Circuit works great so far at 9V DC (instead of 12V). Scope shows a nice square wave at 10.22K Hz, 14.8% duty cycle. I can't wait till I have this finished. I have some RF suppressor toroids comming as well. I ordered the Fair-Rate suppressor toroids (PN 2661102002) I'll let you guys now if they work out.
-
Great find and topic Alex ;)
This is exactly the kind of thing I was starting to experiment with. It was clear to me that an over unity device would use permanent magnet flux to output extra energy. Richard Willis Magnacoasters device works on this principal.
I have 2 identical large toroid transformers of 300va each. Primary is for 120vac @ 100mH and 1 Ohm with double secondaries of 40vac each @ 14mH and 0.2 Ohm each.
Do you think these would work to test your device?
ADDED: Alex, I tested these toroids with my inductance meter and when I approach even a large 2" magnet the Inductance does not drop since the cores are steel. If your effect is based on the inductance drop that a magnet does on a ferrite core coil then these toroids won't work.
I do have 4 of the identical ferrites (attached below) you have. Been collecting them from old CRT monitors I strip for parts;D... looks like a popular size.
FYI: I posted this in the other topic:
Hi everyone,
just to let you know that I donated out the last 3 RA circuit boards Groundloop had professionally made and donated to me for free distribution and mailing to help anyone interested in testing the RA circuit.
Thank you once again Groundloop for your kind generosity.
Luc
-
Great find and topic Alex ;)
This is exactly the kind of thing I was starting to experiment with. It was clear to me that an over unity device would use permanent magnet flux to output extra energy.
I have 2 identical large toroid transformers of 300va each. Primary is for 120vac @ 100mH and 1 Ohm with double secondaries of about 35vac each @ 14mH and 0.2 Ohm each.
Do you think these would work to test your device?
I also posted this in the other topic:
Hi everyone,
just to let you know that I donated out the last 3 RA circuit boards Groundloop had professionally made and donated to me for free distribution and mailing to help anyone interested in testing the RA circuit.
Thank you once again Groundloop for your kind generosity.
Luc
(THANK YOU GROUNDLOOP!!!)
Luc, I thought about that myself... A week or so ago I contacted someone at Bridgeport Magnetics (tortran.com) to ask what voltage level would saturate their toroid transformers (just to see). They said their 120v transformer cores start to saturate at 140V and completely saturate at 155V. I specifically was asking about their 1-1 transformers. I'm not sure what core material, or number of windings, they were referring to but I think that may give you a starting point.
-
@Groundloop,
I've been following your progress with great interest. I have some magnetics knowledge, but not much electronics. I just wanted to point out some things we have discussed related to Steorn's demo device on another forum. I think there may be some discussions over there which could improve the efficiency of this solid state device you are working on. Here's a sample:
http://www.moletrap.co.uk/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=647&Focus=32821#Comment_32821
(You might need to register and leave a comment or 2 to the admin to access the forum)
I also think you should keep tabs on TK's youtube videos.
Best of luck,
0c
-
(THANK YOU GROUNDLOOP!!!)
Luc, I thought about that myself... A week or so ago I contacted someone at Bridgeport Magnetics (tortran.com) to ask what voltage level would saturate their toroid transformers (just to see). They said their 120v transformer cores start to saturate at 140V and completely saturate at 155V. I specifically was asking about their 1-1 transformers. I'm not sure what core material, or number of windings, they were referring to but I think that may give you a starting point.
Interesting Staffman :)
Let's see what Alex thinks of them.
Thanks for sharing.
Luc
-
Luc,
It is great that you have decided to also do research on this, and also thank you for your kind words.
( It is -13 degrees Celsius outside here now, probably due to lack of global warming, but your nice
words keep me warm. :-) )
I don't know much about you mains transformer toroid but if they are approx. the same as the
ones manufactured in Sweden (Toroid International AB) where I get my mains toroid, then the core
will be tape wound with cold-rolled grain oriented silicon steel. You could probably use the primary
of you toroid at your switch but the voltage must be high enough to start saturating the core
so that you get a shielding effect. It will probably work. It will be a BIG system with those 300 Watt
cores, that is for sure. :-) The Ferrite tubes you have will be a nice test setup for a cheaper system.
I like to start out at a smaller scale and then scale it up if we get something to work as planned.
It shouldn't take long for you to wind a couple of those Ferrite tubes and start testing since you
already have the RA circuit. Looking forward to hear more of your testing.
Alex.
-
@Staffman,
Thanks. :-)
That was interesting information about your Bridgeport Magnetics toroid cores. I'm sure this
holds true even for similar cores from other manufacturing firms. I'm looking forward to see
some testing of those big cores when you get the time to so.
Alex.
-
Hi ,
I you're up already ;D.. here it is 25min. after midnight.
The toroid is about 10cm diameter and 5 cm high (wounded) I'm quite sure the cores are the silicon steel like you say.
So if you think these toroid would work then that means your device effect has nothing to do with the Ferrite core induction reduction when a magnet is close or on the core. Is this correct?
If so, then why are you using a ferrite and for that matter a toroid? would it not work with a regular wound coil? I'm trying to understand why this time you're getting some positive results ??? what's making the difference?
Luc
-
@Oc,
I tried you link but got the following message:
"
Some problems were encountered
The requested discussion could not be found.
"
I have seen all the videos from TK. He is doing a good job researching the motor. Sometimes I
can detect surprises in his voice also. :-) Wouldn't be surprised if he finds some anomalies in
the motor.
Thanks for taking time to contribute to this thread.
Alex.
-
@Oc,
I tried you link but got the following message:
"
Some problems were encountered
The requested discussion could not be found.
"
I have seen all the videos from TK. He is doing a good job researching the motor. Sometimes I
can detect surprises in his A also. :-) Wouldn't be surprised if he finds some anomalies in
the motor.
Thanks for taking time to contribute to this thread.
Alex.
Some of the forum categories over there require membership to access. Here's the text of the post of mine that was linked. It is a list of factors that affect performance and efficiency. However, I think there's a lot of other good information in that and other threads. That is where Alsetalokin hangs out.
"Output Rotor energy is related to:
1) Strength of magnets
2) Size of pole surface
3) Length of magnets
4) Permeability of core materials
5) Bulk of core materials (more is better)
6) Completeness of core saturation
7) Timing of saturation pulse
8) Duration of saturation pulse
9) Time it takes to saturate
10) Angle of coil face WRT passing magnet
Input coil efficiency is related to:
a) Permeability of core
b) Ease of saturating core materials
c) Bulk of core
d) Remanence or bias of core materials
e) Number of turns
f) Wire diameter/resistance vs. input voltage/current
g) Recovery of electrical losses (ringing and spikes)
h) Pulse waveform
i) Timing and duty cycle
j) Induction changes from passing magnets
Have I forgotten anything?"
-
Luc,
I think the effect has to do with magnetic shielding. So any toroid should work. I'm using
a Iron powder toroid on one of my motors and the motor spins. The reason I used Ferrite
was that was what I had at hand. I'm reasonable sure it will work with laminated soft steel also.
I have tried this before in my MEG using regular coils and it did not work. It did not produce
the high voltage in my generator coils. I was using Metglass core in the (Tom Bearden) MEG
that I did build but could not find any great output after a lot of testing. The toroid system is
different because of the magnetic shielding effect. You get an modulating magnetic field going
in the center core. This will generate a lot of voltage in the generator coil. But it is early in
the research. We need to test much more to see if we can get an ou effect.
I have ordered more enameled copper wire and some new Ferrite U cores, I beams and some toroids.
Will be building the double system posted earlier in this thread when the new parts arrive.
I must add that I have not yet tried any resonance tests on this new system. But if you decide
to build this then I bet you are better to test for resonance than me because you have worked
on this for a long time now. I'm just a novice when it comes to resonance circuits.
Alex.
-
Oc,
Thanks for the added information about the Orbo motor system.
In this thread we are trying to make a solid state version. So some of your points will not apply.
But good information anyway. One factor for the solid state will be the frequency. Higher frequency
will give out more power. This is compatible to RPM in a rotor, I guess. One other factor in a solid
state system is resonance in the input toroid cores. This will lower the input usage to almost
nothing while at the same time switch the magnetic field on and off in the generator coil.
So there is a lot to research.
Alex.
-
Oc,
Thanks for the added information about the Orbo motor system.
In this thread we are trying to make a solid state version. So some of your points will not apply.
But good information anyway. One factor for the solid state will be the frequency. Higher frequency
will give out more power. This is compatible to RPM in a rotor, I guess. One other factor in a solid
state system is resonance in the input toroid cores. This will lower the input usage to almost
nothing while at the same time switch the magnetic field on and off in the generator coil.
So there is a lot to research.
Alex.
EXACTLY! Those two items alone, and the addition of the increased flux from double sets of magnets and added steel, might just do the job... :)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Ahhh
Nice to have you back on the scene Bruce!
;D
-
@Staffman,
Today I tried to measure the inductive kick back voltage spike.
I set the o-scope to 5 Volt/Div and used the probe at X10.
So each Div. on the vertical on o-scope is 50 Volt. The inductive
voltage spikes was above the o-scope edge. The setting on
the switch was NOT at maximum. I can go even higher.
So the inductive kick back voltage spike is > 50 *10 = 500 Volt. I estimate
closer to 1000 Volt or more when the switch is at maximum setting.
This is the reason that I'm using a 1500 Volt transistor.
Alex.
-
Wow groundloop! That's one heck of a spike! The IRF PF50 should be here in a few days. Should I worry about frying it?
-
@Staffman,
It will probably survive. It depends on several factors. One is
you input voltage. Two are the toroid coils. Three is how much
power you put into your toroid. So if you don't push the RA
switch to maximum then you should be safe. Your transistor
is rated 900 volt so you can push a lot of power into the
toroid before the transistor blows up.
Alex.
-
:o :o :o
I love big spikes!!
Carry a big stick!!
Alex ,
you have to be scaring the heck out of those electrons.
Maybe now you'll get there attention ;D ;D ;D
Sweet
Chet
-
Chet,
I think there is a direct relationship between the high voltage
spikes and the high voltage output in my generator coil. If I
clamp the coils with a diode then all the output voltage is gone.
Do I dare to remove the diode over the collector and emitter to
see what big negative spikes will do with the output? :-)
Alex.
-
Oc,
Thanks for the added information about the Orbo motor system.
In this thread we are trying to make a solid state version. So some of your points will not apply.
But good information anyway. One factor for the solid state will be the frequency. Higher frequency
will give out more power. This is compatible to RPM in a rotor, I guess. One other factor in a solid
state system is resonance in the input toroid cores. This will lower the input usage to almost
nothing while at the same time switch the magnetic field on and off in the A coil.
So there is a lot to research.
Alex.
Two twin toroid inductors in resonance switching the magnetic field on and off in the A coil, lowering input to practically nothing. Awesome! Don't forget that the natural oscillating frequency of magnetism was estimated to be around 159KHz according to Hans Coler, demonstrator of the Strumzueger. Imagine two variable capacitors, hemi tuners, in adjacency. A powerful variable inductor nearby, regulating the resistance between the variable caps. One cap in series with the toroid's and the other in series with the A coil. This describes the kind of feedback loop Coler's Strumzueger used.
-
Hi Alex,
Last night I lay in bed thinking of this device we are working on and I thought of a easy test that would POSSIBLY allow us to use the other side of the toroid to produce additional power. When you first see my picture, before you dismiss it, there should be enough of an oscillation of the flux on that side to produce something. Even if it is a little, an additional generator coil could be placed on the backsides of all toroid. Anything produced is "FREE" because the toroid doesn't know it is there and the back side is only being used as a gate anyway... ;) Of course, it may produce nothing, but I think it will produce something though not much! Just place a coil over the two magnets and place on the toroid. Add one additional magnet, opposite polarity as you have already deduced on the far side of the coil. pulse and see what you see.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Of all the crappy ideas,..............Just kidding LOL
I tested your idea. I made just a little coil onto a Ferrite tube and put the
new coil as in your drawing. And.................I worked! :-)
The generator coil did give out the same voltage as before and
the new coil was an added bonus. So now we know, three coils
on a setup like this.
Thanks,
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Of all the crappy ideas,..............Just kidding LOL
I tested your idea. I made just a little coil onto a Ferrite tube and put the
new coil as in your drawing. And.................It worked! :-)
The generator coil did give out the same voltage as before and
the new coil was an added bonus. So now we know, three coils
on a setup like this.
Thanks,
Alex.
YES! Very good news indeed!
Next thought is to use your frequency generator to pulse the toroid alone by it's self until you see a "drop" in current. This will be the resonant frequency of your toroid. I'm sure you know this, but more for those reading...LOL Set your switching of the toroid at that frequency and your power consumption should go down.
PS. What is your power input now, into the toroids?
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
The power input right now is zero. I just smoked my transistor.
I'm waiting for some hexfets in the mail and should have them
tomorrow. I'm working on an idea for a new switch that will
give me the resonant frequency automatic. Attached.....
Alex.
-
Great idea there Bruce ;) thanks for your contribution.
I was also thinking ::) last night, what if we pulse one coil at a time which would allow one permanent magnet flux to enter the pickup coil at a time, would the device still work in this configuration? ... if so, wouldn't the toroid that is on not help to combine its flux to the flux of the magnet that is coming in from the open side and vise-versa when it switches to the other coil?
Luc
-
Bruce,
The power input right now is zero. I just smoked my transistor.
I'm waiting for some hexfets in the mail and should have them
tomorrow. I'm working on an idea for a new switch that will
give me the resonant frequency automatic. Attached.....
Alex.
Hi Alex,
Very cool circuit and idea!
You know, having now three generator output coil, all of the outputs will be able to be wired in parallel, allowing for a bump in amperage. :D
While we await your Hexfets, we will continue to think. LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Luc,
It will work. I have tested with just one magnet and I get power.
But it will give half the power. So switching one toroid and then
the other will give 1/2 + 1/2 = 1.
Alex.
-
Hi Alex,
OKAY, I think I have figured out how to add EIGHT more output generator coils without adding any more toroids!! :o
Let me know as soon as your hexfets come in and we can test the idea with one coil...and if it works for that one (and I think it will!) It will work for the rest! That would give us a total of ELEVEN output generator coils!
I don't want to tell the idea until you can actually test it...! Anticipation...LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Make a drawing and post it here. :-)
Alex.
-
Perhaps you could try this one:
-
Bruce,
Make a drawing and post it here. :-)
Alex.
Hi Alex,
Okay, I am absolutely convinced, that the first test will show positive...because the magnetic flux does not "see" what we see, I realized that the field lines will flow to the edges of the toroid, from the magnets, and when the toroid is switched on, boom, field lines are no longer attracted and then toroid is switched off and power is generated in our coils! Just because there is no hole, should NOT matter. (I hope!! LOL)
The first picture is of the test, with two coils! If that works, all EIGHT (second picture) can then be wrapped and added!!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
@futuristic,
Thank you for your contribution to this reserch, and welcome to this thread.
Good ideas are always welcomed.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Great idea. WoW, this generator can really grow to a monster in a short time.
I will test the 90 degrees method and report back soon.....
Alex.
-
Bruce,
I have tested my small coil at a 90 degree angle to the toroid, and guess what,
I T W O R K E D ! ! !
Attached is my idea. Use a toroid tube at some length and we can fit as many
generator coils as we want.
Now we need to start building.
Alex.
-
This scheme got me thinking that you could actualy put cylindrical or ring magnet with radial magnetization iside of toroid.
This would make shorter magentic paths and stronger magnetic field. ;)
But in this case you would have to remove two generator coils that are symetrical with the hole of toroid and only use x number ob those that are positioned 90 degrees to the toroids hole.
-
@futuristic,
Yes you are correct. But where to buy tube Neos that have one pole at the outside
and one pole at the inside? The toroid tube can be made by stacking several toroids
and then wind the copper wire onto all of them at the same time. That said, I have
found that we do not need a extra strength magnetic field. The magnetic field must
be just strong enough so that the toroid is able to switch it off.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
I have tested my small coil at a 90 degree angle to the toroid, and guess what,
I T W O R K E D ! ! !
Attached is my idea. Use a toroid tube at some length and we can fit as many
generator coils as we want.
Now we need to start building.
Alex.
A W E S O M E ! ! ! !
Hi Alex,
I like your idea, just remember, the larger the toroid (cylindrical or diameter) the more power we will need for the effect! But Y E S, a Cylindrical toroid of A N Y size will work!
Add all of the coils, Alex, and then let's work on efficiencies with your proposed circuit, powering the toroids at their resonant frequencies. I also have a great idea for increasing dramatically each of the efficiencies for A L L of the generator coils! ! !
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Just brainstorming... If cylindrical magnetised magnets are hard to find, maybe we could use regular ;)
-
Bruce,
I got my new hexfets today so I will repair my switch. But I will not get the ordered
copper wire and other stuff until next weekend. So I will not be able to build any new
generator setup until then. It seem that the sky is the limit but we need only 1 Watt
continuous output to prove that the system works. So I will build my resonant oscillator
circuit and try that out, but with one coil only since I do not have any more wire.
Alex.
-
@futuristic,
Good idea.
Yes that will work. But I think it will be easier just to stick one
magnet at each toroid end. We need just a little field to get
the generator output going. So if we use your center core idea
and then stick a magnet at each end, then it will be perfect.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
I got my new hexfets today so I will repair my switch. But I will not get the ordered
copper wire and other stuff until next weekend. So I will not be able to build any new
generator setup until then. It seem that the sky is the limit but we need only 1 Watt
continuous output to prove that the system works. So I will build my resonant oscillator
circuit and try that out, but with one coil only since I do not have any more wire.
Alex.
Hi Alex,
I could help you with buying the wire, gladly!
What is the frequency of the electrical power on your one output coil, with your present set up?
We can test my generator efficiency increase on this set up. But first I need the frequency.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Thanks for the offer. But I have already ordered more wire.
The frequency of my RA switch is from approx. 1KHz and up to 19KHz with
the component values the switch has now. But as I said, I will build the
resonant oscillator and test what the resonant frequency for the coils are.
Will report back later when done.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Thanks for the offer. But I have already ordered more wire.
The frequency of my RA switch is from approx. 1KHz and up to 19KHz with
the component values the switch has now. But as I said, I will build the
resonant oscillator and test what the resonant frequency for the coils are.
Will report back later when done.
Alex.
Hi Alex,
When you are testing, please test what frequency is on the output generator coil, for me please. What I am thinking is this. Whatever the output frequency is determined to be, use a cap and resistor on the generator coil and have that coil resonate at that frequency. By tuning it thus, it should increase it's efficiency dramatically and give us a larger output. If that turns out to be the case, as I think it will, then all 11 coils can be tuned in the same manner. I think when this thing is done, we could end up with a 1KW machine, self running, easily! LOL
What I also like about it, is that unlike other projects (non public) that I have been a part of, if this is fed back with it's own energy, there is zero chance of a lightening strike, because it will not produce any more power on the output than what it is going to be designed for. That, in my opinion, makes it very safe to work with...when we get to that point! ;) Thanks!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hi Alex,
When you are testing, please test what frequency is on the output generator coil, for me please. What I am thinking is this. Whatever the output frequency is determined to be, use a cap and resistor on the generator coil and have that coil resonate at that frequency. By tuning it thus, it should increase it's efficiency dramatically and give us a larger output. If that turns out to be the case, as I think it will, then all 11 coils can be tuned in the same manner. I think when this thing is done, we could end up with a 1KW machine, self running, easily! LOL
What I also like about it, is that unlike other projects (non public) that I have been a part of, if this is fed back with it's own energy, there is zero chance of a lightening strike, because it will not produce any more power on the output than what it is going to be designed for. That, in my opinion, makes it very safe to work with...when we get to that point! ;) Thanks!
Cheers,
Bruce
Hi Bruce,
I highlighted in the above quote I ask: What you mean here on output?
Output voltage or output power?
Because if I got you, you would make the generator coil to be a resonant tank circuit for the input switching frequency, right? This is ok and the AC voltage across this tank will surely increase, usually the Q times of the tank quality factor (XL/r) where r is the coil copper loss with the core loss and XL is the inductive reactance of the coil at the resonant frequency.
But if you wish to utilize the resonant power in the tank, you have to match the load to the tank and unfortunately output power will be less than that of reactivly circulating, depending on the loaded Q that remains, when the load reflects back the tank.
Have you thought about the resonant matching needs and if so how you would go about it I wonder.
Thanks, Gyula
-
Hi Bruce,
I highlighted in the above quote I ask: What you mean here on output?
Output voltage or output power?
Because if I got you, you would make the generator coil to be a resonant tank circuit for the input switching frequency, right? This is ok and the AC voltage across this tank will surely increase, usually the Q times of the tank quality factor (XL/r) where r is the coil copper loss with the core loss and XL is the inductive reactance of the coil at the resonant frequency.
But if you wish to utilize the resonant power in the tank, you have to match the load to the tank and unfortunately output power will be less than that of reactivly circulating, depending on the loaded Q that remains, when the load reflects back the tank.
Have you thought about the resonant matching needs and if so how you would go about it I wonder.
Thanks, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
Yes, you understand what I was thinking...but, as you state, we need to match the load to the tank...any ideas of your own, while I ponder?
Simply looking for a means to make the generator coil(s) as "efficient" as possible. We want every single amp and volt! LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
-
All,
I have done the first test where I used the one transistor oscillator. I made one
feed back coil in one of the toroid and used that as a trigger for the transistor.
The input usage @ 12,02 Volt was 0,654 Ampere. The output voltage from the
generator coil was 92 VAC. The frequency of the oscillator was as in the attached image.
I must add that the frequency without magnets on the toroids was around 1KHz.
And more magnets = higher frequency. I also had to "adjust" the inductive voltage kick
back from the two toroids by using different magnet strength on each toroid.
The inductive kick back from the toroids did not come at the same time and
the output was low. But when I put different magnets strength on each side then
both toroids gave the kick back voltage at the same time and the output went high.
I attached a 230VAC 15 Watt light bulb as a load. The generator voltage was 30 VAC with load.
Alex.
-
All,
I have done the first test where I used the one transistor oscillator. I made one
feed back coil in one of the toroid and used that as a trigger for the transistor.
The input usage @ 12,02 Volt was 0,654 Ampere. The output voltage from the
generator coil was 92 VAC. The frequency of the oscillator was as in the attached image.
I must add that the frequency without magnets on the toroids was around 1KHz.
And more magnets = higher frequency. I also had to "adjust" the inductive voltage kick
back from the two toroids by using different magnet strength on each toroid.
The inductive kick back from the toroids did not come at the same time and
the output was low. But when I put different magnets strength on each side then
both toroids gave the kick back voltage at the same time and the output went high.
I attached a 230VAC 15 Watt light bulb as a load. The generator voltage was 30 VAC with load.
Alex.
Hi Alex,
Very interesting information. It makes it sound like tuning the circuit to the resonant frequency of the toroids will be difficult...hmm..
One idea to make the input more efficient, is to measure across the Generator coil, and slowly drop the voltage on the input side. We need far less input power to "turn off" the field with the toroid, based on others experiments working on the mechanical version. Perhaps one of those circuits, but with a differant means to trigger of course...What are your thoughts?
Also, a friend of mine suggests taking the gen output coil leads and going to a capacitor, and from there to a full wave bridge rectifier and then reading out the power in straightline DC. Perhaps even smoothing it out a bit more, so that we can see where we really are, power wise on the gen output coil. This would be a good test, I think...What are your thoughts on this?
Cheers,
Bruce
-
But where A tube Neos that have one pole at the outside and one pole at the inside?
http://www.supermagnetman.net/index.php?cPath=40&osCsid=5beb2ee702aec6de520648eafa4f01da
-
Bruce,
Yes, the circuit is difficult to tune and the output is like radio frequency.
I move a wire and everything changes. Sometimes I can measure voltage
on the DVM with one wire only.
I have made a diode bridge and used a 2,2uF 630 volt capacitor. The high
volt is for safety when I forget to clip on a load. So I already have that.
I have tried charging another battery and that works OK.
I think that I have brought this setup as far as I can go. So next I will
start making the setup with a center toroid and several output coils.
I think that is the way to go.
My hope is also that other will start to replicate this. Soon 22000 members
on this forum. How many is doing research?
Alex.
-
Oc,
Thanks for the link. I will check it out.
I also found a magnet man in Germany.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Yes, the circuit is difficult to tune and the output is like radio frequency.
I move a wire and everything changes. Sometimes I can measure voltage
on the DVM with one wire only.
I have made a diode bridge and used a 2,2uF 630 volt capacitor. The high
volt is for safety when I forget to clip on a load. So I already have that.
I have tried charging another battery and that works OK.
I think that I have brought this setup as far as I can go. So next I will
start making the setup with a center toroid and several output coils.
I think that is the way to go.
My hope is also that other will start to replicate this. Soon 22000 members
on this forum. How many is doing research?
Alex.
I agree, I too believe that more output coils is the way to go. Also, it will allow you to wire the outputs in parallel and increase the amperage.
There will be plenty of replicators once we show some real power on the output vs input. Not many have your electronic skills. So, hang in there and keep going! ;)
I am still awaiting my toroids and magnet wire that I have ordered. I will be building as well. I have a brooks coil I want to test as a Generator coil. I also have my mechanical version build, awaiting a toroid.
P.S. How many Ohms is one of your toroids? I looked back at page 1 and didn't see that info. Thanks!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
I am also awaiting parts. Should be in sometime Monday. I've also ordered some nylon coated steel wire to test an idea someone made on the mechanical thread. The suspense is getting unbearable...
-
Bruce,
I measured the two toroid coils in series to be 0,8 DC Ohm.
The generator coil to 1,2 DC Ohm. The trigger coil to be 1 DC Ohm.
I'm really looking forward to your replication. It will be fun to compare
results and share research.
Alex.
-
@Staffman,
>>The suspense is getting unbearable
Yes, I know how you feel. LOL
Alex.
-
Hi Alex,
Could you please try a 100 ohm resistor in place of the bulb on the generator coil output and tell me what the voltage is across the resistor?
Also, a scope shot of the sine wave on the output across the resistor?
Inquiring minds want to know... LOL :)
Thank you,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Attached images shows volt and scope with 100 Ohm 1% Metalfilm resistor over
output coil. DVM set to 20 Volt AC range.
Scope set at: Time Base = 20uSec/Div
CH1 Probe to 10X
CH1 = 0,5 Volt/Div
Ground at center of screen.
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Attached images shows volt and scope with 100 Ohm 1% Metalfilm resistor over
output coil. DVM set to 20 Volt AC range.
Scope set at: Time Base = 20uSec/Div
CH1 Probe to 10X
CH1 = 0,5 Volt/Div
Ground at center of screen.
Alex.
Thank you for the test.
But shoot, that is not good news at all... :( I was hoping it would have read 30 volts on it or so....
So, I calculate with 2.9 volts (real)
across a 100 ohm resistor gives us .029 amps
for a total of 0.0841 watts from one generator coil.
We would need to both drastically DECREASE the input required power and figure out a way to gain more wattage from the generator coil.
With eleven coils we will have .9251 watts. I can't recall how much power your present circuit is using.
Any ideas any members have reading this to harvest more useable power from the Generator coil would be appreciated.
One thought is to perhaps collect on the output with a capacitor (after diode) and then redo the 100 ohm test again. I think this may work better for us...perhaps.. ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Maybe some large steel washers between the toroids and the generator coil. Just thinking that the added permeability would help, not sure how much tho. Could even use steel as the coil form instead of using ferrite.
Another thought is to use steel wire in the generator coil, but the resistance of the coil would suffer.
-
Hi Alex,
In discussing this project with some others this evening via telephone, a suggestion was made to make a steel horseshoe and link the magnets to see if a clearer path for the flux, might allow for better performance on the coil generator. This was also suggested, I think by Gyula some time ago. It would be an easy experiment, just use some angle iron or the such. It would be worth a try.
Cheers,
Bruce
EDIT:
Also really worth trying, if you still have several toroids on both ends, change that to only ONE toroid per end and see how that does on the output generator coil. Thanks!
-
Bruce,
Yes it is a little disappointing but this test was with the resonant oscillator
running and the phase between the two toroids was horrible. We get better
result with a switch that has frequency and duty cycle control. My toroids
are not optimal either. Remember that this is the first system thrown
together just to see if the method works.
Also, 100 Ohm load is not the best load for the output coil because I have found
that this is a high voltage system, not an transformer. The output is like an RF
transmitter and the load must fit the impedance to get the correct output.
We have proved that the system works. We have proved that it is possible to
use several coils as output. And we have proved that a magnetic field can be
shielded and modulated. We have also proved that when using resonance then
the input will be greatly reduced.
So I still think it is important to build a proper and bigger system that are much
better designed and tuned and test that. This I will do.
Alex.
-
Great, Alex. I am right there with you. Lot's of room to experiment and to make improvement. I think it has merit.
As you said well, we have proved many things out already. Now to optimize! My toroids some day will arrive (lol..I hope tomorrow) and then it is winding time.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hi Gyula,
Yes, you understand what I was thinking...but, as you state, we need to match the load to the tank...any ideas of your own, while I ponder?
Simply looking for a means to make the generator coil(s) as "efficient" as possible. We want every single amp and volt! LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
Hi Bruce,
Well, lumped circuit matching theory is at our service here, at least this is what I thought of. It simply means you can get the highest output power if you conjugate match the generator coil to a load.
So in case of Alex gen coil, it has 1.2 Ohm DC resistance and an L self inductance with XL inductive reactance. This is best matched to say a incandescent lamp that has 1.2 Ohm resistance at a certain rated wattage AND you have to place a capacitor in series with the lamp to compensate for the gen coil's XL with an equal value of capacitive reactance, XL=XC at the output frequency. (In this simplest matching case, you create a series resonant circuit and you "ruin" the unloaded Q quality factor of the gen coil by "doubling" its copper resistance i.e. adding the same value resistance, 1.2 Ohm, the load, in series with it.)
Of course you can choose to use coupling coil(s) wound onto the same generator core, you can wind the gen coil with several taps to make matching variable to different loads (you may not have a correct wattage lamp with the needed ohmic value at hand etc etc). In these matching cases you place a capacitor in parallel with the gen coil to make it resonant at the output frequency and test which tap gives the best output power on a load (a lamp, a power resistor, etc) because there would be one tap only wrt any one coil ending, where you achieve the above requirement, all the other taps will give less output power. Effectively in this parallel resonant case you have a resonant transformer, with taps or with coupling coil(s) to transform down the high value resonant voltage.
rgds, Gyula
-
Yes it is a little disappointing but this test was with the resonant oscillator
running and the phase between the two toroids was horrible. We get better
result with a switch that has frequency and duty cycle control. My toroids
are not optimal either. Remember that this is the first system thrown
together just to see if the method works.
We have also proved that when using resonance then
the input will be greatly reduced.
Alex.
Would the output coil need to be resonate at twice the frequency as the toroid control coils?
This would make more sense because when they resonate there is a positive side of the wave and a negative side. The only time they would be conducting the field from the magnets is when they are off and that would be at the zero crossing point of the wave.
-
@gyulasun,
Thank you for sharing information in this thread.
I agree that lumped circuit matching can be used in this case.
Alex.
-
@exnihiloest,
Thank you for commenting and sharing information.
Can you share the test you did regarding that magnetic saturation of a material
depends on the direction of the magnetic field? And maybe explain more about
your test?
If you look at the various motors then you can see all the different ways the
toroid core is positioned, horizontal standing, horizontal flat etc. And the
motors do run.
I will try to test this with a toroid core, a magnet and
a generator coil that can be positioned in any direction on the toroid.
Alex.
-
@lumen,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I have not yet tried to measure the output coil frequency.
Right now I do not have a running system because of other
testing.
Alex.
-
Hi A,
In discussing this project with some others this evening via telephone, a suggestion was made to make a steel horseshoe and link the magnets to see if a clearer path for the flux, might allow for better performance on the coil generator. This was also suggested, I think by Gyula some time ago. It would be an easy experiment, just use some angle iron or the such. It would be worth a try.
A simple large C clamp alone would be enough to gain from the horseshoe effect!
-
@exnihiloest,
Thank you for commenting and sharing information.
Can you share the test you did regarding that magnetic saturation of a material
depends on the direction of the magnetic field? And maybe explain more about
your test?
If you look at the various motors then you can see all the different ways the
toroid core is positioned, horizontal standing, horizontal flat etc. And the
motors do run.
I will try to test this with a toroid core, a magnet and
a generator coil that can be positioned in any direction on the toroid.
Alex.
Alex,
May I draw you attention to the clip put forthed by Ossie AKA Callanan in the mechanical Orbo thread:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uv33bsORbw
The big toroidal coil seems to repel the magnet located radially outside the soft iron core.
No ferrite was used, just soft iron sheet made a round core and wires wound around it.
The idea of putting many magnets around the toroidal core may work, due to this interesting effect discovered by Ossie.
Aaron5120
-
@synchro1,
Thank you for sharing. I have tried using some soft Iron as a crossbar
between the magnets at each end of the toroids. I also tried to stack
many magnets at each end and then orientate the magnets so the the
magnets was 90 degrees at the toroid core, thus bringing the magnets
ends closer together. Then I used soft Iron between the magnets.
I could not see any increased output because of this.
I have seen that the magnet strength does not have to be big at all.
The best result is when the magnet strength is just big enough to allow
the toroid cores to do the job with the power input at hand. So it seems
that there is a balance between magnet strength, power input to
the toroids and toroids mass and number of turns.
Alex.
-
@aaron5120,
Thanks for commenting.
I did look at that video. Ossie is doing great research.
I have noticed the same effect in my solid state setup. I can get
power output from my generator coil when the magnets is 90 degrees
on the toroids.
The Ossie test is good news for testing a solid state system with
generator coils at 90 degrees on a tube toroid core. Another great
feature of the Ossie test is that we can use cheap Iron as a core
and that the core can be made much larger. This will allow us to
have magnets inside the core lined up with the generator coils.
Another thing is that it is easy to wind a core with a large diameter
hole in the center. Ossie is doing a great job.
Alex.
-
The big toroidal coil seems to repel the magnet located radially outside the soft iron core.
Just to make the things clear so nobody gets confused...
The coil is not repelling anything, its just that when coil is saturated, the magnetic fields of both magnets are no longer trapped into iron core and so they repel (if magnets are facing with the same poles).
I am certain that you already know that it's just that we should carefully pick our words when trying to explain what is going on in any new configuration.
-
Hi Groundloop and all,
I was wondering Alex if we could use the Flynn Parallel Path idea to do the same thing?
The first image below is the Flynn Parallel Path basic idea.
The second image I modified and added coils on each ends.
I'm quite sure you're familiar with the Flynn Parallel Path. It's claimed to make over 3 time the magnetic field strenght of an electromagnet. It should work well with the H-Bridge switch to make the reversing fields for the flux gate coils and it could easily be brought to Resonance with the right Capacitor in Series.
Link to basic info: http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Flynn_Parallel_Path_principle_device
Let me know what you think.
Luc
-
Luc,
I have read about the Flynn Parallel Path but not in detail.
I did build the Tom Beardens MEG and that one did not yield
any over unity. The first I'm going to test is the double path
solid state I posted earlier. If this test turns out bad then I see
no problem reconfiguring the setup to try out your idea.
Alex.
-
Thanks for the quick reply Alex,
Do you have a image of that one? what post number is it?
Luc
-
Luc,
Never posted my MEG here. Attached is a image of the unit.
The double path solid stater is on page 1 of this thread.
Alex.
-
Hi Alex,
Here is a "fun" thought experiment. Any thoughts? :)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
The Neo magnet in the Metglass core is so strong that if I try to
remove it then I will rip the core apart. The Metgalss core is
tape wound and extremely brittle. But you have a good idea.
Alex.
-
@Groundloop,
Something like that MEG coil ...
Take a coil of heavy garden wire (soft iron) and wind copper magnet wire around it into a toroid. The iron wire acts as both a permeable core and generator coil as the field oscillates.
Just a wacky thought.
-
Hi Alex, did you ever use
smaller magnets or bigger airgaps between magnet and core with this Metglas core ?
It would be probably fully in saturation and
it would really be hard to switch the flux from
one leg to the other with low input power, so I guess
you killed the right effects with this very strong magnets
being on a totally false BH curve working point...
You really need to measure the flux density in the airgap
with a Gauss meter
so you know what BH working point you are on...
Regards, Stefan.
-
Oc,
I have not tried garden wire. I will let the Tom Bearden MEG rest for now.
I spent almost three months testing that unit back in 2007. I did build
the MEG from patent information but did not get it to work. Maybe I will
try more testing on the MEG one day but not right now. I have had more success
with the toroid shielding and I think that can be implemented into this MEG.
Alex.
-
Stefan,
Something to try out, yes. I did not try lesser strength magnets.
But you are probably right that we must get the correct field strength
to get this to work. So this is on top of my "to do" list the next time I
take out the MEG for a spin.
My main focus right now is to build the double field solid state as described
on page 1 in this thread.
Alex.
-
Hi Alex,
This post here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8411.msg222284#msg222284 we must think through how to use a high permeability, high induction coil for our "magnetic shielding" switch. This should lower our input power dramatically!
We would need to make sure the strength of the magnetic flux is just < than what is needed to saturate the core. Add a touch of current to make the difference and boom, our "switch" is on and then off and one cycle gives us juice in our generator output coil. Maximize the output coil by using Brooks coils and increase the "frequency" to the MAX and we should be back off to the races!! ;D
You would need a mininum switching circuit. Just enough current to make the saturation difference between the core and the magnetic fields on both sides of it. We must be much more "technical", about this. If we are, I can see us with a greater output.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
I read the link you posted. I agree that "We must be much more "technical", about this."
but the more technical I go, the more money it costs me. The resent materials I just
bought for the double solid state did cost me over 3500 Norwegian Kroner. (700USD)
And I still need to buy some plastic sheets to build the coil formers, glue etc. So this
"free energy" research is far from free. :-)
Alex.
-
Bruce,
I read the link you posted. I agree that "We must be much more "technical", about this."
but the more technical I go, the more money it costs me. The resent materials I just
bought for the double solid state did cost me over 3500 Norwegian Kroner. (700USD)
And I still need to buy some plastic sheets to build the coil formers, glue etc. So this
"free energy" research is far from free. :-)
Alex.
Hi Alex,
The Metglas cores are only about 2 to 3 USD each. I happen to own 6 Brooks coils, that I had professionaly made. I would be willing to ship you 2 (loaners, for they were VERY expensive...LOL) to test with as the generator output coils. Simply PM me your mailing address and I will ship them UPS. I will pay for the shipping.
Do you have a gauss meter? This would also seem to be a much needed piece of equipment., and I need one myself. Slowly, piece by piece we can put together what we need. :)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Oc,
I have not tried garden wire. I will let the Tom Bearden MEG rest for now.
I spent almost three months testing that unit back in 2007. I did build
the MEG from patent information but did not get it to work. Maybe I will
try more testing on the MEG one day but not right now. I have had more success
with the toroid shielding and I think that can be implemented into this MEG.
A.
Sorry Groundloop,
I didn't make myself very clear. I was referring to the MEG only to illustrate the coil-within-a-coil concept. But my suggestion was related to the Solid State Orbo. The coil of garden wire would give you a high permeability core that can be saturated but would also generate electricity as the toroidal coil of copper surrounding it is pulsed. It would be a lot smaller than that MEG coil.
This way, your generator coil is built into the core of your SS Orbo. Just add magnets and a battery.
0c
-
Bruce,
Thank you for your kind offer to loan me two maximum inductance with a given length of
wire coils. I starting to go into a mild information overload right now and need to focus
on the actual build of my two field solid state. I see no need to use your coils right
now, but will consider your offer at a later stage of testing. I'm sorry to say that I
do not have a Gauss meter. I did put that on my xmas list but I did not get it. :-)
@Oc,
Thank you for clarifying your thought on this matter. Insulated soft Iron wire is
probably a great method for combining a core and a coil into one compact unit.
Alex.
-
Hi Groundloop and all,
I was wondering Alex if we could use the Flynn Parallel Path idea to do the same thing?
The first image below is the Flynn Parallel Path basic idea.
The second image I modified and added coils on each ends.
I'm quite sure you're familiar with the Flynn Parallel Path. It's claimed to make over 3 time the magnetic field strength of an electromagnet. It should work well with the H-Bridge switch to make the reversing fields for the flux gate coils and it could easily be brought to Resonance with the right Capacitor in Series.
Link to basic info: http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Flynn_Parallel_Path_principle_device
Let me know what you think.
Luc
Hi Groundloop,
I have a new video demonstrating the Flynn Parallel Path Device for the idea I shared above.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAO44dOC6m0
The coils and cores I used are from shaded pole motors which are used in 50 CFM Bathroom exhaust fans @ $20.ea. I though of trying these before investing too much time and money in this device.
I must say that I'm impressed with the results and we also need to keep in mind that my video is only demonstrating the flux release side when the coils are activated and not demonstrating the more then double the magnetic flux attraction power at the opposite end. I still need to add some pickup coils on each ends to see how it would work out in that configuration.
I also think this effect can make an interesting motor. Here is a video I found on YouTube of someone that has built on using the Flynn Parallel Path concept. Notice that when his motor is under load the current does not go up. I find this very interesting ;) Isn't the Orbo doing the same thing ???
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yoM4Qjmduk
Alex, please let me know if you prefer I not post this in your topic.
Thanks
Luc
-
Hi Luc,
No problem, just post your result here. It seems to be a related subject.
I did look at the videos and was impressed by the attraction force and the minimum
power needed to cancel the flux. You can make powerful motors with this system.
And if it works in a motor then the solid state will also work.
Thanks for sharing.
Alex.
-
The problem with the Flynn parallel path flux gating is that the coil has to equal the strength of one of the magnets. This takes a lot of power compared to the coils in resonance, flux gating on their own with practically no input. Ossie Calanan demonstrates a metal band doing the job in one of his videos. Perhaps two of these cheap toroid's, one on each end of a coil core, with the magnets inside and the rim glued to the core can be wired in series and achieve tank resonance, cutting input to a bare minimum unlike the Flynn flux directing coil that requires as much power as to equal the strength of one of the parallel magnets. That's a lot of power!
-
@synchro1
Would you mind reading this link that includes Paul Noel's ideas on how to connect two or more parallel path setups into one other, this way the input power can be minimized and you can get higher input-output separation too:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:FPPMT:Paul_Noel
from "Parallel Path Backdraft " in the middle and lower down.
rgds, Gyula
-
@Gyula.
Wow! Very powerfull innovation. I need time to digest this. Thank you very much for directing me to that Peswiki article. Paul Noel writes that if the field could be shifted by means of a "Magnetic Diode", something apparently still yet accomplished at the time of his writing, the potential for the generation of power would be limitless. Perhaps the flux shifting toroid might be classified as a "Magnetic Diode"? I'll try and get back to this thread with some additional input in due course.
-
Here is my idea I would like to test, when my magnets arrive. Any thoughts on whether it will work as drawn?
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hi Bruce,
from my tests and understanding a toroid seems to keep most of it's magnetic field inside the core, so I would be surprised it would work better than a standard coil to overcome the PM flux.
I could be wrong though :)
Luc
-
Hi Luc,
You are correct, and that is why we have the idea is to use the toroid as a make and break virtual switch for the flux. While the toroid is in the "on" stage, the flux is broken from the "parallel path" and then when the toroid is "off" the flux is able to once again flow. By simply oscillating the flux, on and off, we create power on the pick up coils. ;)
That is how it plays out in my head anyway... LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Third version is IMHO the best, but you don't need two toroids only one big enough.
-
Hi Luc,
You are correct, and that is why we have the idea is to use the toroid as a make and break virtual switch for the flux. While the toroid is in the "on" stage, the flux is broken from the "parallel path" and then when the toroid is "off" the flux is able to once again flow. By simply oscillating the flux, on and off, we create power on the pick up coils. ;)
That is how it plays out in my head anyway... LOL
Cheers,
Bruce
Yes Bruce you're right!... I see that now. Thanks for clearing it.
The disadvantage would be the large air gap between the toroid windings and toroid core :-\ but if the magnets are strong enough the flux will still go through.
Humm, maybe the toroid core could be contacting the laminations and wind in between the open areas.
Luc
-
Yes Bruce you're right!... I see that now. Thanks for clearing that.
The disadvantage would be the large air gap between the toroid windings and toroid core :-\ but if the magnets are strong enough they will still go through.
Humm, maybe the toroid core could be contacting the laminations and wind in between the open areas.
Luc
Hi Luc,
The pictures are not to scale. I will be using an air gap of .032" This will also be the same gap I use between the steel. There needs to be very small air gaps. I think I will use tooth picks on their edge, to keep them seperated.
Here is my favorite one, so far,
Cheers,
Bruce
-
@Bruce,
Your schematic has two toroids intersecting the stator, but no third magnet. Place the toroids above and below a third magnet in the middle, between the magnet and the stators, then place the output coil on one side only, and leave the other side open. Then when you activate the flux blocking toroids, 3.5 times the flux is directed through the coil wrapped armature to one side. Naturally, the stator would need to be shaped larger in the middle to fit the toroids above and below the middle magnet.
-
@Bruce,
Your schematic has two toroids intersecting the stator, but no third magnet. Place the toroids above and below a third magnet in the middle, between the magnet and the stators, then place the output coil on one side only, and leave the other side open. Then when you activate the flux blocking toroids, 3.5 times the flux is directed through the coil wrapped armature to one side. Naturally, the stator would need to be shaped larger in the middle to fit the toroids above and below the middle magnet.
Hi Synchro,
Like this? ???
-
@Bruce,
Your schematic has two toroids intersecting the stator, but no third magnet. Place the toroids above and below a third magnet in the middle, between the magnet and the stators, then place the output coil on one side only, and leave the other side open. Then when you activate the flux blocking toroids, 3.5 times the flux is directed through the coil wrapped armature to one side. Naturally, the stator would need to be shaped larger in the middle to fit the toroids above and below the middle magnet.
Hi synchro1,
when I suggested to use the Flyn Parallel Path design with the coils on each end I was also suggesting to use a constant polarity flip AC circuit like an H-bridge circuit. This way each coil will go from zero flux to 3.5 times flux. Do you not think this would work?
Thanks for your help
Luc
-
With such a small air gap...would not thin cardboard or thick paper allow for a smaller gap, and prevent debris from clogging up the gap at a later time ?
This is an excellent example of lateral thinking BTW.
Regards...
-
@Bruce,
Nice work! I realized that all one need to do is to increase the diameter of the middle disk neos between the toroids, to equal the strength of two stacks on each side and allow for the space needed to fit the toroids in between. Also, based on Paul Noel's idea of "Backdraft", it would be possible for the first air gaped armature to act as a middle magnet for a second larger parallel path apparatus, now coupled to a T shape, providing over ten times the flux force in the larger armature coil to one side. I also noticed your schematic has the second unwound armature on the other side. That one has to leave. The amplification of force by this kind of coupling presents a real solid chance to go overunity.
@Luc
Based on a study of Wesley Gary's analysis of the neutral zone and his application to the fluctuating armature on his pole shifting generator, there is one current generated when the armature is polarized, and another when the magnetic field colapses. There seems to be no advantage to re polarizing in the opposite direction, as the current generated the other way is the same as the first. Bad news for grounloop's new project. One way to zero is as good as pole reversal. With the coupling approach, half the pulses would yield five times the force to one side and save some burned out DPDT switches at the very least. One can see how a nano watt IC could switch giga Gauss of magnet force with enlargement and reduction of the bridge couplings scale. Perhaps a good power plant for a high voltage lifter. Also I believe the switching of the toroids would encounter less eddy interference then the standard Flynn magnetic wraps switched back and forth.
-
@synchro1,
Said:
>>Bad news for grounloops new project.
Please explain in more detail why you think this setup won't work.
Do you have a magnetic simulator program? If yes, is it possible to
simulate this circuit?
Anybody with a magnetic simulator program out there?
Alex.
-
@Bruce,
Nice work! I realized that all one need to do is to increase the diameter of the middle disk neos between the toroids, to equal the strength of two stacks on each side and allow for the space needed to fit the toroids in between. Also, based on Paul Noel's idea of "Backdraft", it would be possible for the first air gaped armature to act as a middle magnet for a second larger parallel path apparatus, now coupled to a T shape, providing over ten times the flux force in the larger armature coil to one side. I also noticed your schematic has the second unwound armature on the other side. That one has to leave. The amplification of force by this kind of coupling presents a real solid chance to go overunity.
@Luc
Based on a study of Wesley Gary's analysis of the neutral zone and his application to the fluctuating armature on his pole shifting generator, there is one current generated when the armature is polarized, and another when the magnetic field colapses. There seems to be no advantage to re polarizing in the opposite direction, as the current generated the other way is the same as the first. Bad news for grounloop's new project. One way to zero is as good as pole reversal. With the coupling approach, half the pulses would yield five times the force to one side and save some burned out DPDT switches at the very least. One can see how a nano watt IC could switch giga Gauss of magnet force with enlargement and reduction of the bridge couplings scale. Perhaps a good power plant for a high voltage lifter. Also I believe the switching of the toroids would encounter less eddy interference then the standard Flynn magnetic wraps switched back and forth.
I plan to build and test this. I have the pickup coil (Brooks coil) and will source out my steel, once I size everything out. Cores are already on order, Metglas. Magnets are on order, lot of them...LOL
I will post videos on youtube as I build it, as I am doing with my Steorn magnet motor.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
@synchro1,
Said:
>>Bad news for grounloops new project.
Please explain in more detail why you think this setup won't work.
Do you have a magnetic simulator program? If yes, is it possible to
simulate this circuit?
Anybody with a magnetic simulator program out there?
Alex.
Hi Alex,
I actually like your drawing a lot. It may indeed work. We were simply discussing the "parallel Flux" path idea. Supposedly, there is a "Flux magnification process" that happens. This would be good news!
EDIT:
Is that a standing wave set up, having an inverted phase, that I see? :D
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Yes. I already have the micro controller switch ready to go.
Need to wind the four new toroids. Will probably make this
circuit this weekend.
Alex.
-
Groundloop,
Your schematic looks great. I don't have the program your talking about. I believe your MEG would generate the same amount of power if the magnets were unidirectional. It appears to me that your design would generate low ripple AC and require a full wave bridge rectifier to store. It also includes unnecessarily complex circuitry that would eat up power. I didn't say it wouldn't work. I'm merely pointing out that it might work more simply. Please move forward with your design, though, there are usefull applications for AC.
-
@synchro1,
I do not agree with you. The output from the center coil will be sinus like.
Because when all toroids are off then there will be a magnetic field in
both directions in the center core canceling each other out. When I
switch on two of the toroids then we get a field in one direction through
the center core, and opposite when the two other toroids are on. So
by alternating between the two pairs of toroid we will get a alternating
magnetic field through the center core. The core look like this ][ .
Alex.
-
@Groundloop
You may have the magnets shown wrong in the diagram?
Shouldn't it be N and S at top and N and S at bottom?
-
@Bruce,
Nice work! I realized that all one need to do is to increase the diameter of the middle disk neos between the toroids, to equal the strength of two stacks on each side and allow for the space needed to fit the toroids in between. Also, based on Paul Noel's idea of "Backdraft", it would be possible for the first air gaped armature to act as a middle magnet for a second larger parallel path apparatus, now coupled to a T shape, providing over ten times the flux force in the larger armature coil to one side. I also noticed your schematic has the second unwound armature on the other side. That one has to leave. The amplification of force by this kind of coupling presents a real solid chance to go overunity.
snip
Hi Synchro,
Is this now correct?? ??? Please ignore the flux lines...I will redo them later.
Thanks!
Bruce
-
Alex,
I like your idea! I'll follow this thread closely.
4Tesla
-
@ Synchro,
In this last picture, I have added the T. Did I do it correctly and are the magnets positioned correctly, etc.. This should give the Ten Times multiplication of the flux, correct?
This is the one I will build, if it is correct.
Thank you,
Bruce
-
@lumen,
Yes you are right.
I will not use glue on the magnets. I can test all magnets orientations on the
finished unit. What I'm trying to do is not a parallel path system. I want to
test the toroid ability to shield a magnetic field. So the orientation of the magnets
is so that when no toroid is on, then the field is trapped in the closed path
between the outer cross bar and the center of the core. This means that with
the magnets correct positioned, we have a path going through the center of the core
that is opposite for each magnets pair, thus "zeroing" the field. By switching
each pair of toroids as shown in the drawing then we will get just one field
going in one direction through the center of the core. And by alternating the
switching between the two pairs of toroids, we get an alternating field through
the center of the core. That is the plan.
@4Tesla,
Thank you for taking time to follow this thread. If the test of toroid magnetic
shielding used this way turns out to be a good way to do it then I'm sure we
can expand this idea to something useful. Lot of work though. :-)
Alex.
-
Alex,
you can find some idea in this site:
http://www.skif.biz/index.php?name=Pages&op=page&pid=175
principle:
http://www.skif.biz/index.php?name=Pages&op=page&pid=176
copy and paste in Google language translator.
ciao!
-
@wings,
Thanks for the links, I will check them out.
Alex.
-
I want to test the toroid ability to shield a magnetic field. So the orientation of the magnets
is so that when no toroid is on, then the field is trapped in the closed path
between the outer cross bar and the center of the core. This means that with
the magnets correct positioned, we have a path going through the center of the core
that is opposite for each magnets pair, thus "zeroing" the field. By switching
each pair of toroids as shown in the drawing then we will get just one field
going in one direction through the center of the core. And by alternating the
switching between the two pairs of toroids, we get an alternating field through
the center of the core. That is the plan.
Now that sounds like a good idea!
It might work better if the distance between the magnets was almost a square shape and less rectangular. Might increase field strength through the core.
This should be a good test.
-
@Bruce,
Everything appears to be correct except that I envisioned the output coil on the larger of the two stators for the 10 times the flux. I see now perhaps that both single armature's might be wound with output coil wraps, and your version might work just as well as you presented it. The Backdraft concept of Paul Noel's, Backdraft closes a large door I imagine, would allow for an ever increasing progression of interlocking parallel path stators and armatures, triggered by one tiny one at the beginning of the chain. The performance of the toroid coils might be surpassed by Ossie Calanan's metal hoop which I imagine might just fit tightly around the middle magnet. Good luck! I look forward to your youtube video with great enthusiasm.
@Groundloop
The mispositioned magnet polarities threw me off somewhat, but after reading your description of the functioning, I am satisfied that your work will prove to be very fruitfull. You are the prime mover and original inventor of this approach. Everything emanating from this yeasty thread is due to your breakthrough. I anticipate more ground breaking achievements from your research. Thank you.
-
@lumen,
There is not much I can do with that. When you put two cores together
then the middle part will be twice as thick as the rest of the core. See
attached image.
Alex.
-
@lumen,
There is not much I can do with that. When you put two cores together
then the middle part will be twice as thick as the rest of the core. See
attached image.
Alex.
You could try something like an "H-Core". I have no idea where to find one, but something like that might fill your need. See figure 2 on page 12:
http://books.google.com/books?id=SMASAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA162&lpg=PA162&dq=transformer+%22h+core%22&source=bl&ots=Uozy_6nhkn&sig=SImjM81mMbxNJNgcCl1bI87EwY8&hl=en&ei=I_9VS8sjitK2A7Or_LsN&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=55&ved=0CNMBEOgBMDY#v=onepage&q=transformer%20%22h%20core%22&f=false
-
Hi everyone,
I have an update video of the Flynn Parallel path device since my first test was not well done. You will see the results are even better in this test 2 video then the previous one.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i91F5VQD4JM
Luc
-
Hi Luc,
Great test.
Attached is maybe something to test in your setup?
[Edit] Got the magnets wrong, corrected that.
Alex.
-
@Bruce,
Everything appears to be correct except that I envisioned the output coil on the larger of the two stators for the 10 times the flux. I see now perhaps that both single armature's might be wound with output coil wraps, and your version might work just as well as you presented it. The Backdraft concept of Paul Noel's, Backdraft closes a large door I imagine, would allow for an ever increasing progression of interlocking parallel path stators and armatures, triggered by one tiny one at the beginning of the chain. The performance of the toroid coils might be surpassed by Ossie Calanan's metal hoop which I imagine might just fit tightly around the middle magnet. Good luck! I look forward to your youtube video with great enthusiasm.
Snip
Hi Synchro,
How about this? Is this what you were picturing? Of course, I will be able to try the coil in different locations, but I would like to succeed the first time out... ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hi Groundloop,
the drawing you posted is close to exactly what I posted before and what I'm going to do with this, except you have one set of magnets turned so it is not a Flynn Parallel Path. Is this your suggestion and is this what the MEG is?
Is it in phase pulse dc for both inputs? or AC like the H-Bridge?
Luc
-
Luc,
I have corrected the magnets in the drawing.
Sorry about that.
Looking forward to your testing. Will you test both with and without magnets?
Alex.
-
Okay Alex ;)
I will test it with and without magnets ;D
Luc
-
Luc,
I managed to get the big Neo out of my Metglas core without much damage
to the core. So now I have something to test your idea on. :-)
Alex.
-
Hey guys!
A friend of mine sent me to this post, over two years old...and WOW!
I will quote it here and repost the pictures.... Sound and look familiar? ;D
Hello all. I was wondering, not too long ago I found this page http://www.inkomp-delta.com/ (http://www.inkomp-delta.com/) and on it is a Meg alike system shown.
There is also a YouTube video, it is a bit different then the one on their own page. The device seems to be enclosed in this bigger control box.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npFVaeSbk1Q&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npFVaeSbk1Q&feature=related)
Now it all look very promising, in the video it seems the thing is past a Cop of 2...,and it indeed is a surprisingly fresh and 'new' way of doing this 'permanent magnet switching'. See the attached photo's (Or the one on their page) they have these 'toroid' (close looped) input core sections which will function as a 'magnetic resistor' once magnetized/saturated. And so the flux form the magnet will have to find another way around. Now we all know that saturating a core section does not take much power. Another 'novel' thing here is, is that the flux from the input coil never interacts with the output coil so there is a separation. That way only the flux from the magnet will do the power 'generation'.
I also found some other info about it on some MegBuilders group, here it is:
Hi all!
I recently discovered one Bulgarian experimenter that built MEG like
device with COP > 1. His Website is here: www.inkomp-delta.com. The
site is in Bulgarian, so I asked him and he uploaded one page in
English (http://www.inkomp-delta.com/page9.html).
Valeri generously agreed to answer my questions and we talked for a
few hours. There are 2 conclusions that I got from this conversation,
and I want to share them with you guys:
1. Valeri claims that magnetic flux from control coil and output coil
should be separated. He claims that the structure presented in TB
patent (with mutual flux for both coils) cannot work. He worked
around this problem by inserting additional toroidal core inside the
main core. The control coil is winded on the additional core but its
flux does not go to the output coil.
2. He also claims that capacitor is absolutely necessary to be
connected to the output coil to obtain resonance. It also makes TB's
patent claims about zero phase difference between output coil voltage
and current somewhat suspicious.
There were also other interesting points like:
3. He said that nanocrystalline material is not absolutely necessary
for the effect to be observed. Such materials can improve efficiency,
but nothing unique happens inside the core. For example, one of his
prototypes with measurements published on the Website
(http://www.inkomp-delta.com/page6.html) works at 50Hz (!!!) with
regular transformer steel core and exhibits COP up to 5.4.
4. He also proposed a few constructions for his ideas in his patent
application (http://inkomp-delta.com/page4.html). It's also in
Bulgarian, but all schematic figures are in couples. The first
presents a state without current in control coil, the second presents
a state with current in control coil. Permanent magnet flux is in
blue. Control coil flux is in red.
I hope the above points will help somebody. At least for me it
changed a lot.
So there you have it. What do you think?
I have not seen this being discussed before on overunity.com
So maybe any of you have some insights in this tech or maybe speak Bulgarian and be able to translate the whole lot?
Thanks!
Regards,
Logan
-
Wow is the werd. I read it and the cap for resonance makes sense. Were there some tpu's that used magnets that didnt require an input?
Mags
-
I believe this cuts all the additional routing of the fields and possibly improves efficiency.
The outer windings are the output and the toroidal windings control the field.
When the toroidal windings are off, the core becomes the field conductor for the output windings.
-
Wow is the werd. I read it and the cap for resonance makes sense. Were there some tpu's that used magnets that didnt require an input?
Mags
I too had suggested on Alex's prior test to turn the output coil into a resonant tank. This inventor claimed that it was the only real way to pull power off of it.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Thats funny lumen, I got the same or similar idea except for the coil arrangement. Actually I have the coil next to me, Ill make a pic later. Imagine a coil 1.5 in. long by 3/4 in. width and 3/8 in. air core. Now I am going to wrap this coil as if it were an elongated toroid with some fine wire for low current. This may not require a magnetic core to make the original coil disappear and reappear. i have som 3/4 in x 3/8 n52 mags that make this a tidy experiment. Just the wrapping of the toroidal coil will be many wraps. I am going to make 3 separate windings for options.
We will see. So the idea is to use the least input to block and release so we can get more in return from output.
Ya know, latly I have been seeing electrons moving slowly. Just visualizing, not that I actually see them. silly
But in a circuit of very high resistance and very low voltage, I visualize them kinda just a bit jumbly, shoving and bouncing as a new one enters the circuit from the source, one exits, but its not the electrons that are moving at light speed, its the pressure wave in the matrix. I wonder if there is a resonance for electrons, a freq that we just vibrate them without pushing them into a resistive position, thus zero transmission resistance. Im sure at 60 or 50 hz there is some real electron movement.
-
Before I run off to wrap this, I just had some thoughts of why this is going to work well. Imagine the toroidal coil off and the 2 mags passing through the gen coil. Now imagine the twisting turmoil in the gen coil while the toroid is on. So just the change of field in the gen coil should generate something. Just goin left, before I go right. I may try a thin core in the middle, the toroid should still foul it up. Trying the simple first.
Mags
-
Luc,
I managed to get the big Neo out of my Metglas core without much damage
to the core. So now I have something to test your idea on. :-)
Alex.
That's great Alex ;D
I think the best way to find how much PM flux a core can take is to start with small (thin) neo magnets and add one at a time and use DC to coils and very slowly raise the voltage so not to pass the sweet spot as you can see in my video test 2 just half a volt over and the effect reverses :P
It is not as easy as one may think ::)... most of this stuff isn't
Glad you will be testing this also.
Luc
-
Luc,
Yes I understand you. Now that I got rid of the strong Neo then I can
try out many different magnet strength. Have to rewind the coils first, though.
Alex.
-
Ok well on my way to the shop I had thought of a few things and my design changed slightly. I see magnetic fields of 1 pole seeking the shortest path to the other, just as the pic that Bruce posted above, even if it is an opposite pole of another magnet. So I thought that just a toroid between 2 mags may not make enough of a change when applying the toroid pulse. The magnets fields would sure be attracted through the un energized core, but when it becomes invisible (energized) some field is still flowing through that area. We want to find another shortest path to the opposite pole, well here is my answer to that.
Magluvin
-
The way I look at it, It will be switching the magnetic path from inside the green coil wrapped ferrite bead, then when the red wire is powered, the magnets will look for the shortest path through the outside core. Then when red wire is de energized, the magnet will choose the shortest path again. This should give good output by switching flux flow from inside the green coil to the outside causing ac output.
Mags
-
@Magluvin,
Very good work done. Looking forward to your testing.
Alex.
-
@All,
Honeywell Metglas AMCC-320 Core has got the coils on. :-)
Alex.
-
@Magluvin:
Very nicely done. But where will you put pickup(generator) coils?
-
Sorry I see it now. Green wire on the toroid is pickup coil.
-
@Magluvin,
Great idea you have there ;). I'm also looking forward to your test results.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
@Bruce,
Look at the way you have the armature pictured in the smaller stator. It is to the outside with an airgap, large enough to cover the end thickness of the stator arms. You pictured the larger stator with the armature enclosed inside the stator arms. It needs to be lengthened and brought to the outside with an airgap so it resembles the the armature on the smaller one. The size position and air gap of armature on the large stator needs to be proportionally identical to the way you have the small one pictured. Now, all that's left is to wind the output coil on the larger armature, the way you pictured it wound on the smaller one in your earlier versions.
The coil wrapped toroid allows magnet fields to connect through the unenergized toroid core, then separate when the toroid coil is energized. Ossie Calanan wound a circular metal band that he demonstrates working conversely from the toroid on youtube. When the coil ring is unenergized, he has magnets attracted to the metal by like poles from each side. When he energizes the coil, one magnet flys away from the coil from the linked repulsion. Think about this option. This magnetic diode effect is where experimentation now needs to be focused. The blocking by attraction of the metal ring and flux linking by coil energizing need to be measured and compared to the converse reaction of the toroid. The coil wound metal band loop is cheaper, easier to wind, uses less space then the toroid, and may even allow for higher switching rates. Paul Noel mentions how a then hypothetical magnetic diode, just four years ago, would switch a Hallbach array to a unidirectional field. Another amplification effect.
Consider this: One coil wrapped toroid between two magnets in the middle, rather then one on each end, or a small coil wrapped band around a central magnet with a magnet on each side for a total of three as a middle magnet trigger.
-
Hey guys!
A friend of mine sent me to this post, over two years old...and WOW!
I will quote it here and repost the pictures.... Sound and look familiar? ;D
Hi Bruce and All,
It is good you quoted the text on the Bulgarian MEG, here are some more links on nice animations and / or further ideas on the same, from that thread for those who may not be aware of them
:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4300.msg134122#msg134122
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4300.150
Needless to say, all setups shown are based on soft iron core saturation, caused by the input current.
rgds, Gyula
-
Ok Here is a vid of my version of SS eorbo. My next go at it will be with more toroid turns to increase the effect and possibly efficency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ljx1py-BUs
Magscave
-
@Bruce,
Look at the way you have the armature pictured in the smaller stator. It is to the outside with an airgap, large enough to cover the end thickness of the stator arms. You pictured the larger stator with the armature enclosed inside the stator arms. It needs to be lengthened and brought to the outside with an airgap so it resembles the the armature on the smaller one. The size position and air gap of armature on the large stator needs to be proportionally identical to the way you have the small one pictured. Now, all that's left is to wind the output coil on the larger armature, the way you pictured it wound on the smaller one in your earlier versions.
snip
Okay, this should finally be it... LOL I am going to build this. My cores have come in and I am soon to order my iron oxide powder. I am going to make forms, lay it out and mold my pieces.
I am thinking of mixing in some nanoparticles just for fun... ;D I think it would help. I am looking VERY forward to this build!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
One more vid. Down to 2 AA bats 2.4v and using a string of 1/4 x 1/8 neos inside the core to replace the large mags.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYXU_ClBrIA
Im tired, goin to sleep
Mags cave
-
Ok Here is a vid of my version of SS eorbo. My next go at it will be with more toroid turns to increase the effect and possibly efficency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ljx1py-BUs
Magscave
Hi Magscave, I must say that video looks impressive.
If you hook up your Ammeter between your battery feed to the coil does the amp draw change when you add the magnets and the output voltage shoots up?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
-
Hey Got
I havnt measured the amps yet. But for what you are saying it sounds interesting, to see if there is change with the magnets in or out. As for how much is being used, I think that finer wire and more turns will keep input down.
Like in this vid, start at 3:14 into it, this guy seems to have what agentgates was going to show, and if you look a bit further, the vid shows some of this stuff you guys are trying. And I see that I need more toroid turns,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neiOQgYw_Qc
Mags
-
Was just looking at the pics Bruce posted at the top of the previous page and if you think about it, pickup coils could be put all over that thing, not just around the gapped end. There is a lot going on there.
Mags
-
Hey Got
I havnt measured the amps yet. But for what you are saying it sounds interesting, to see if there is change with the magnets in or out. As for how much is being used, I think that finer wire and more turns will keep input down.
Like in this vid, start at 3:14 into it, this guy seems to have what agentgates was going to show, and if you look a bit further, the vid shows some of this stuff you guys are trying. And I see that I need more toroid turns,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neiOQgYw_Qc
Mags
Hi Mags,
did you measure the Amp draw yet?
I also have a question about the way you wound your green pickup coil. I think you said you wound it like a standard coil. Is this correct? if so, that would mean you wound it on the outside surface of the ferrite toroid and not going through the center hole of the toroid core which would mean that the green wire is at 90 degrees from the red primary coil. Is this correct?
Awaiting you reply. Thanks for sharing.
Luc
-
I'm skeptical about this project. If they could remove the battery it would impress me. Or if they could perform this simple test.
Start with a charged battery and a Dead battery (identical). Begin the Orbo on the charged battery and then feed the excess energy into the dead battery. After a fixed period of time flick a switch that engauges the battery which has been charging off the produced power of the orbo. If the Orbo runs longer than it took to charge the dead battery then you have over unity.
Not sure if anyone mentioned this test. But it just popped into my head.
-
@hovis4cyl,
If you want to discuss the Orbo motor then please do it
in the "STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM" thread.
This thread is for solid state systems.
Groundloop.
-
@Bruce
Congratulations, perfecto! I have an acronym for this model: The (FOMEGA). Flynn Orbo Motionless Electric Generating Amplifier. Good luck.
-
Luc
This setup seems to drain the batteries faster than my pulse motors. I am assuming that it is due to too few windings on the toroidal windings at 3 ohms. I would like to see about 15 to 20 ohms there. I got tired of the wire tangling or there would have been more here. Wrapping a toroid requires a specific amount of wire to be cut beforehand. A time consuming wrap.
The pickup coil is wrapped to the inner core first, 3 layers of 50 turns each 26 ga. then the red toroidal coil is wrapped over that.
Check out this vid below. At 3:14 sec in it seems to show Agentgates idea. Then just after that, 3:50 , something very close to my lil Orbonbon setup. The pickup coil wrapped on the core in this vid is closer to what I want and also the toroidal wrapping is more to what I would like also, more turns virtually covering the toroid.
it seems like all these ideas have been there all along.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neiOQgYw_Qc
Will have a bigger better Orbonbon this weekend. Maybe an Orbaseball. =]
Mags
-
I played with the Orbonbon a bit.
The big mags were too much, but they also have their opposite ends exposed. If they had a path to the other side there may be a difference.
The 1/4 x 1/8 in series does very well inside the inner coil. The number of them to get the most is the number that gets them just below flush on each end. I put some biasing mags on the sides of the outer core and there is some that help a lot. But just with the 1/4 in strip, I get 150 - 160v out now. I put an led on the green coil before the bridge, and it was toast. I saw literal lightning in this one. So I shut it down, grabbed my cam and did a very short vid of the lightning and the new output record for the Orbonbon. This weekend I will re wrap for more output and more invisibility turns. I really want to get less input and more output.
From here it seems like an easy direction to follow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5LFSsdUCTE
Does anyone have an SS orbo going yet?
Mags
-
Hey guys!
A friend of mine sent me to this post, over two years old...and WOW!
I will quote it here and repost the pictures.... Sound and look familiar? ;D
Quote from: LoganBaker on March 17, 2008, 04:32:56 PM
............
..........................
2. He also claims that capacitor is absolutely necessary to be
connected to the output coil to obtain resonance. It also makes TB's
patent claims about zero phase difference between output coil voltage
and current somewhat suspicious.
..........
..................
Thanks!
Regards,
Logan
After looking at the Pancharatnam-Berry phase, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berry_phase , and the Aharonov-Bohm effect, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aharonov-Bohm_effect , TB's claims on zero phase difference doesn't look suspicious at all.
It has to do with the uncurled A potential outside the core, due to the localized B field inside the core, pulling extra energy into the core from space/time itself. Steorn, TB, and the Adams motor appear to all be based on pulling this extra energy from space/time into the core based on the same effect. There are so many similarities between all of these devices and they all have the same common theory.
Wheeler clearly pointed out that mass and space continually interact. Quoting Wheeler: "Space acts on matter, telling it how to move. In turn, matter reacts back on space, telling it how to curve."
http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/On%20the%20Aharonov-Bohm%20Effect1.doc
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Site:LRP:The_Suppression_of_the_M.E.G._by_General_Electric
GB
-
Ok I just posted a vid of Orbonbon current draw. And an example of output. Next is to add to the toroid to lower input and increase the invisibility effect and hope for more output.
Next is Orbagel! Err SausageMcOrbo!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HAjkSNiXZ8
Magscave
-
magluvin,
nice work so far :-)
im tempted to join in to be honest.
lololol @ Orbagel & Sausage McOrbo
David.D
-
Just got in from work :P
Thanks Magscave for making the new video with the current test ;)
I will post a new video hopefully in the next few hours that you will enjoy Magscave
Stay tuned and thanks for sharing your work.
Luc
-
Thanks Luc And Rave.
Im half way dont winding my new Orbonbon. Im using the same cores but a lil different winding.
Ill explain and it make full sense.
Im winding the toroid coil first. By winding the pickup and the core together, the toroid may be disrupting the pickup as it does the core. By wrapping the toroid first and then the pickup, I will get my ac magnetic flow working the way I think it should.
I believe I was getting a good dc pulse from a jump to the inner core from the outer, but when I make the core and maybe the coil invisible, Im missing out on that half of the pickup, and maybe something else for that matter.
So winding the toroid first, then the pickup on top should give better results. I just figured this out about an hour ago and started wrapping. I should be done in about a half hour. It is 28 ga for the toroid coil and Im using the same for the pickup. I happened to just have 2 of those ferrite beads and the first one will be changed to this configuration also. We dont want a good effect to be come a bad one.
This is a very good way of going about this. We get a full shift of magnetic current from the inside to the outside of the pickup, not just on/off dc as some of these designs show, where the off results in a spike, this results in an AC generator, at a particular freq of course. So we get something from the on and the off. =]
Magscave Magluvins Oven, Orbonbons
-
Well not much to vid. I used a thicker toroid wire and Im not happy with it. I decided to try it just from what I see others coils on orbo repl. I fail to see that they are getting such low current consumption. My voltage was up to 140 and my load went up to over 3v w/100ohm.
So we cant look at it like it were a regular transformer in any way. So as a standard, I would say thin wire and many wraps for the toroid = low input current, good canceling field.
My pickup was about 90 turns, and I got more current out. Gota figure, I was getting almost 200v but my load res only went up to 1.6v, now my high is 140v but my load is up to 3v. So if my toroid is less effective at low ohms, low no of turns, if I get 200v on the new pickup with more wraps of thin, my load voltage should increase also, and my input should go down. I think. =]
This new toroid gets warm quick, I dont even want to see the amperage.
mags
-
Hi all,
I have not been able to get any good results (worth sharing) by adding a pickup coil to the Flynn Parallel Path device I have built :-\... not too sure why but I decided to put it aside for now and replicate Magluvin idea and got results as soon as I tested it.
Here is a new video of my testing the Magluvin PM flux gate coil: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3_vr8VIdpE
Please ignore me saying the coils are 90 degrees out of phase. They are just at 90 degrees from each other. It's strange the stuff we say when we are doing a few things at the same time :P
I really like Magluvin's concept with the coils being at 90 degrees from each other. This prevents the primary pulse to transfer to the secondary. A kind of Isolation between the two. So if there's activity on the secondary it maybe coming from the PM flux ???
Luc
-
Good Go Luc!
What freq was that? Have you tried longer duty cycles?
Glad to see you like. Im about to hook up my second one for the day. This one I ran very fine wire, like 35 - 40, like a hair, for the toroid winding. I used a plastic rod that I made notches in the ends to pre wrap the thin wire on and it allowed me to thread the ferrite bead many times easier than the way I was doing it. Were were bored as kids and we did a lil crochet. lol we did.
And my pickup is 20 ga of 16 turns. I dont care at the moment about how high the voltage is, im looking for some current.
My input should be pretty low. Im doing a vid after I try it.
Mags
-
Well my fellow Orbonians, Im beat. Wrapped 3 new coils and the first that I did yesterday is the winner thus far. I even did the OrboMcMuffin. There seems to be a happy medium with toroid windings. Or maybe I just need to have proper input. I can only imagine running the Orbonbon at 12v. That would be if the reeds could handle the load.
As I made conclusions, it got worse. I have no idea if containing the pickup within the toroid is better. I would have to do 2 each way and see.
The clincher is, was I getting that big voltage from induced bemf from the toroid firing. All 3 coils I made tonight I expected way more, but got less as I tried harder. I got 16v from the OrboMcMuffin. So low. Well the first thing to do is, redo each with toroids over pickups and se if there is a difference. If their better this way, then there must be a magic magnet bemf thing going on, because if I Remove the magnets, my voltage is maybe 2v
Maybe there is a reaction withing the toroid that has an impelling effect on the pickup other than just switching flux path. May it is what Agentgates is seeing. It is a basic toroid with the pickup in or on.
I also want to try an air core with a toroid wrapping. Put it between 2 mags if it has this distorting effect on the pickup, then maybe the ferrite is in the way. Dunno, Its 5:54 am and Im shleepy. Visions of Orbonbons and Orboplumbs dance in my head.
Mags
So I got my mosfets out an my 556 so I can do a lil pwm. Time to get out of the cave and into the trees. Ooo oo
mags
-
So I got my mosfets out an my 556 so I can do a lil pwm. Time to get out of the cave and into the trees. Ooo oo
mags
Hi Mags,
you will have more success using a PWM and MOSFET as switch. You will also see why I used a very short duty cycle. If you could get your hands on a scope, that would also help tremendously since without it is like working in the dark. You can pick them up used on eBay for $30. to $60. or a new USB 40MHz for $180. delivered.
Luc
-
Gee guys, I think were to late!
Check out this patent: US20090096219
-
Gee guys, I think were to late!
Check out this patent: US20090096219
Pay careful attention to the FINEMET cores used for the toroidal coils mentioned in the patent. I've been pushing FINEMET as the core material in the other thread over the last few days now. Metglas may not be the right material. Both FINEMET and Metglas needs to be tested and the results compared.
Here's an "Intro Finemet brochure" in a PDF file, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=362
GB
-
@GB
In the patent they did mention other materials, possibly with the same properties.
-
@GB
In the patent they did mention other materials, possibly with the same properties.
Thanks Lumen. This is a great find. Good Job.
GB
-
Also note the prefered rise times
They are in the order of 50 nanoseconds or less...
Nice finds
Thanks for posting.
-
Ok I broke out the 556 and an IRFZ44n to drive the Orbonbon. I also dug out my old RS ProbeScope.
Just a lil demo of the output phase relationship with the magnet polarity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gjQpIISvIM
Mags
-
Ok I broke out the 556 and an IRFZ44n to drive the Orbonbon. I also dug out my old RS ProbeScope.
Just a lil demo of the output phase relationship with the magnet polarity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gjQpIISvIM
Mags
@GB
In the patent they did mention other materials, possibly with the same properties.
take a look also to this one:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=FS6gAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
-
Pay careful attention to the FINEMET cores used for the toroidal coils mentioned in the patent. I've been pushing FINEMET as the core material in the other thread over the last few days now. Metglas may not be the right material. Both FINEMET and Metglas needs to be tested and the results compared.
Here's an "Intro Finemet brochure" in a PDF file, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=362
GB
GB Thanks for the brochure.
Is it possible that Metglas and FINEMET may be the same material?
Both are listed in the same brochure as if they are just different trade names or companies supplying same products.
A little confusing to me.
Bill
-
GB Thanks for the brochure.
Is it possible that Metglas and FINEMET may be the same material?
Both are listed in the same brochure as if they are just different trade names or companies supplying same products.
A little confusing to me.
Bill
Metglas and Finemet are not the same material. Finemet is a much softer magnetic material due to it's nano-crystalline structure, as described on page 8 of the Finemet brochure. Metglas appears not to be a nano material (I have yet to find a reference saying metglas is a nano material).
There are three types of B-H curves with Finemet ("H", "L", and "M" type) and can be found on page 2 of the Finemet brochucre. There are three types of B-H curve squareness with the Finemet; high, middle and low remanence ratio, corresponding to various applications.
Metglas,Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidary of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd.
Finemet is owned by Hitachi Metals, Ltd.
Both Metglas and Finemet are part of the same company but they are different products. Both have a different manufacturing process.
I agree, it is confusing.
-
Pay careful attention to the FINEMET cores used for the toroidal coils mentioned in the patent. I've been pushing FINEMET as the core material in the other thread over the last few days now. Metglas may not be the right material. Both FINEMET and Metglas needs to be tested and the results compared.
Here's an "Intro Finemet brochure" in a PDF file, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=362 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=362)
GB
My measurements already show that the Metglas MAGAMP core in the "tiny orbo replication" was ~ COP 2. :) IMO both Metglas and Finemet will work well. Metglas has higher permeability than Finemet. Finemet has higher saturation. Take your pick. Either way both cores are great. I've owned both Metglas & Finemet cores for years. Amazing stuff.
btw, I only have time to read a few threads at this forum, which does not include this thread. I only came here because someone linked to GB's post. So I won't see your reply here, only in the Steorn replication thread.
-
Metglas and Finemet are not the same material. Finemet is a much softer magnetic material due to it's nano-crystalline structure, as described on page 8 of the Finemet brochure. Metglas appears not to be a nano material (I have yet to find a reference saying metglas is a nano material).
There are three types of B-H curves with Finemet ("H", "L", and "M" type) and can be found on page 2 of the Finemet brochucre. There are three types of B-H curve squareness with the Finemet; high, middle and low remanence ratio, corresponding to various applications.
Metglas,Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidary of Hitachi Metals America, Ltd.
Finemet is owned by Hitachi Metals, Ltd.
Both Metglas and Finemet are part of the same company but they are different products. Both have a different manufacturing process.
I agree, it is confusing.
Metglas makes a lot of cores that are noncrystalline! The Metglas MAGAMP is nanocrystalline and has a *HIGHER* permeability than any Finemet core, which makes Metglas cores softer than Finemet.
Metglas MAGAMP, which is Metglas 2714A square loop, has the highest permeability of all cores, 1 million -->
http://www.metglas.com/faq/?faq_id=35 (http://www.metglas.com/faq/?faq_id=35)
btw, Finemet was created by Hitachi. Metglas, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hitachi Metals America Ltd.
Anyhow, try both cores. If you need highest permeability and softest magnetic material, then Metglas is the one. If you need higher Bsat, then Finemet is the one. :)
-
Ok I broke out the 556 and an IRFZ44n to drive the Orbonbon. I also dug out my old RS ProbeScope.
Just a lil demo of the output phase relationship with the magnet polarity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gjQpIISvIM
Mags
Hi Mags,
looks good 8)
I also noticed the phase shift when flipping the magnets around.
One thing to note is a FWB for some reason (for me anyways) does not work as well as just using a single diode. Try it to see if you get a difference on the output load if you use just one diode.
The positive hump (can be negative if magnets are switched around) that builds up while the switch is on I think is the magnet flux being pushed by the primary coil pulse since it should not be the primary coils inductance transferring to the secondary since they are at 90 degrees of each other and should not be inductively coupled. Is that how you understand it also?
My best score so far was 95% energy recovery :-\ 1% duty and 6vdc input @ 300Hz
I think we're pushing the PM flux out but not fast enough, or enough of it to come back with a vengeance. We maybe saturating the ferrite core before most of the flux can be pushed out :P
Let me know what you think.
Thanks for sharing.
Luc
-
Hey Luc
I will try the single diode tonight. For some odd reason I cannot get my 170v, and actually I had it gettingover 250v at one point. Then, no mor than 40v. I switched out my bridge for individual diodes as you seen in the last vid. But it wasnt that.
I had done some timer work before with pulse motors and I have a Nitorous controller I made from a 556 that pulses the solenoid to give a 50% shot so I have 2 stages, 40 and 80 horses to choose from.
I have been looking for some thin wall tube ferrite beads. Im thinking that the magnet flux may favor one side of the outer bead due to the bead is not being close to saturation. If it is thinner and as a whole requires the total of the magnets flux to saturate, the flux will be spread more evenly on the switch over.
I have included a pic of what I would like to see in the physical properties from what I have learned. Having the thinner wall ferrites, the distance for the jump is shortened also. This can also be corrected with a longer outer core as shown in the pic. Its not perfect, I just whipped it together to show the basic idea.
-
Metglas makes a lot of cores that are noncrystalline! The Metglas MAGAMP is nanocrystalline and has a *HIGHER* permeability than any Finemet core, which makes Metglas cores softer than Finemet.
Metglas MAGAMP, which is Metglas 2714A square loop, has the highest permeability of all cores, 1 million -->
http://www.metglas.com/faq/?faq_id=35 (http://www.metglas.com/faq/?faq_id=35)
First off, 'amorphous' and '[nano]crystalline' ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE!
The name should tell you...MetGLAS. Glasses are amorphous, i.e. they are cooled so fast that crystalline structure doesn't have time to form. And for a definitive answer, I went to the link that Paul supplied and this is what I found:
Question:
What is Metglas?
Answer:
Metglas is an amorphopus metal, Amorphous metals do not have crystalline structure like other magnetic materials. All the atoms in an amorphous metal are randomly arranged, thus giving it a higher resistivity (about three times) value than that for crystalline counterparts. Amorphous alloys are prepared by cooling the melt at about million degrees per second. This fast cooling does not give the atoms enough time to rearrange into stable crystalline form. As a result one gets metastable amorphous structure. Because of the absence of crystalline structure amorphous alloys are magnetically soft (lower coercivity, lower core loss, higher permeability,...). High resistivity gives lower loss at higher frequencies. The losses are among the lowest of any known magnetic materials.
Also, for the 2714A MAGAMP core that Paul keeps mentioning, it says:
"Square Loop Cores manufactured with cobalt-based METGLAS® amorphous alloy 2714A allow the design of mag amps that can operate at higher frequencies than previously possible. Their combination of magnetic properties enable magnetic amplifiers to provide unparalleled precision and efficiency in output regulation."
So I think it's perfectly clear that @GB's insistence on ACCURACY is justified... and the MetGLAS cores are AMORPHOUS. FINEMET is nanocrystalline. Its all in the name... FINEMET, FINe METal, VERY-FINE=nanocrystals.
-Mark
-
Here are some other properties of MetGlas that might be useful...
http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_1_3.htm (http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_1_3.htm)
"Saturable reactors utilize the large change between unsaturated and saturated permeabilities of their cores to delay current for a preset period of time. Similarly, once saturated in the forward direction, they act as a diode temporarily blocking current in the reverse direction.
"MAGNETIC SWITCH PROTECTION (MSP)
MSP devices made with Metglas®cores have dramatically enhanced the reliability and overall lifetime of pulse power systems. By using a saturable reactor in series with either a semiconductor or thyratron switch, the circuit designer can reduce losses in the switch and extend its life. The saturable reactor is designed to hold-off current until the switch becomes fully conductive. This delay reduces the overlap between current and voltage in the switch, thereby reducing power absorbed in the switch. MSP also offers other advantages. Higher di/dt's to the load are safely achieved by waiting for full conductivity in semiconductor switches. The diode-like characteristic of a saturated reactor provides time for switch recovery."
With the above in mind...
Would the design goal be to time the pulse ending when the inductance is at a maximum to get the most energy from the collapsing field? Could the diode-like behavior of the saturated metglas be put to use to block bemf? Not making any sense? :D ??? Time to get some sleep!
-Mark
-
Ok got the original Orbonbon with original pickup coil but rewrapped the toroid with the 26ga green as on the pickup.
It appears that the pickup need be wrapped by the toroid windings for best results thus far. The new toroidal winding is as many wraps as it takes to cover the inside of the bead wall, there by the outside is spaced accordingly. I am getting some descent output from this setup..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GlR7dNTs4Y
Mags
-
I had found some old 12v small tube style light bulbs from when I was a electronics repair guy, they were from old Yamaha or Kenwood, maybe Pioneer home receivers. They are frosted with thin leads. But I have 6.
So I put some on the Orbonbon. Check it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES00DfhHH-U
Magluvin Oh Yea Luc, its said like Maglovin. Just a slang. I got the idea from a movie where a kid got a fake ID and his ID said McLovin. lol Luv them magnets.
-
MAG, here is the pwm circuit i use, the switch + 3 caps at the bottom can be replaced by a single cap which can be changed depending on what "range" you want.
p.s re:- casting cores, you could always throw in some iron filings etc into the magnetite to increase the permiability, also would be possible to cast a toroid ( albeit a square toroid if you know what i mean ) 1 leg at a time, and wind it 1 leg at a time, joining them up as you go....this would make winding SO much easier than winding a complete toroid all at once.
David. D
-
Thanks Rave
I didnt think of it before, the diode I am using in my 556 circuit is not a fast switching. I found this by searching the 1n4148.
I like the idea of making my own cores. I will look into it.
Mags
-
Did ya ever have one of those things, something you have been working on, and ya seem to be getting good results, but then you find a discrepancy. Something that has not been noticed the whole time. Well I found such.
I was taking power board caps out to try others because one was causing the circuit to act funny when I touched or moved it. So I took it out and the circuit acted funny. Put it back in, was ok. Tried another cap, same thing.
The only thing between the battery and the cap was the on/off switch. I took out the switch and Bam My output went up to 13v on the output with the light bulb gleaming.
I did a vid and went to load it to yt and while I was waiting for the vid to load I had bit back space and the page changed, when I went back it as a new upload page. So I uploaded it again, filled it in and when I went to see my list of vids, both were up there, so I deleted the previous one, and the new one ended up rejected due to duplicate vid. Soooo Im making another one next. It will be up in a few. Ill post when its up. =]
Mags
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSbPpIYTzYI
Here it is
Mags
-
Added some biasing magnets and a different cap on the pickup and I beat the 13v of the last vid above. 16.7v on the 12v light bulb. I am going to have to put them in parallel to strengthen the load, and to conserve these nifty lil bulbs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2D16fnu28M
Mags
-
Mag,
just a couple of ideas to try in terms of numbers / positions/ orientations
1 NEO, flat side against toroid, 1) N pole down, 2) S pole down
1 NEO, edge against toroid, 1) N pole to left, 2) S pole to left, 3) N pole pointing UP, 4) N Pole pointing down
2 NEO's side by side, flat side down, 1 neo N side down, other NEO S pole down, neo's touching edge to edg
2 NEO's.. both flat down, both N pole down ( will have to have them spaced )
2 NEO's as above but S pole down
im sure you can come up with more as you seem very intuitive and full of ideas,
im anxiously waiting for some toroids to arrive in the post, hopefully if ive done my maths properly they will enable me to create what you have to a fairly close tolerence.
Great work so far MAG
-
1 more idea for you MAG,
-
Hey Rave
I have playe with quite a bit of configurations with the mags. The biasing or extra mags are a weird bunch. Like in the vid, I had 2 rows, but with 3 rows, the N n S give more positive results when opposite the other 2. Only thing I can figure is the 2 alone are too strong and the 3rd balances it out. But if I have just the 2 rows and remove 1 from each, it is less output. Its just silly like that.
If you are replicating, the inner bead core is a standard fom a computer monitor cable or other similar. The outside cores when put together equal the length of the inner bead, and there should be about a 1/8 in spacing for wire so the inner wrapped core fits in the larger ones it is just snug with a bit of black tape on the inner core.
Both windings are 26ga. The pickup is 150 turns, 3 layers under the toroidal wrap. The toroidal windings are just enough to cver the inside hole of the inner bead 1 layer, so the 1/4 in mags will fit without chafing the wire. The mags are not tight at all in there. The mags are 1/4 x 1/8 of unknown strength gotten from Ace Hardware in the magnet section and you get 10 for 5 bucks. Great for local and quick.
I am messing around with the timing vs duty cycle right now. I had left a lil bag of goodies at the shop that I thought I had brought home. It had a bunch of nice lil caps and variable res and some other stuff I need. Im about to run up there and get them. Im on a mission dude! =]
Thanks for all the support. My circuit so far is a take off of yours, but I use one pot for freq then another with the diodes off of the ends to do the pulse width, this way the freq stays the same as I adjust the duty. Well close to the same. ;]
Mags
-
Also, a lil tool that helps greatly to do the toroid windings that I made. It takes a bit of wire to wrap and it has to be off of the spool to thread it and it gets tangled. So this helps, time wise also, big time.
Mags
-
Got my circuit board better set up. And I wrapped a new core with 22ga, 60 turns 2 layers pickup coil and did the toroid winding in the same wire with as many turns as it took to fill the inside of the bead 1 layer so the 1/4 mags fit.
It works well and have better current output.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4DXEPcrChk
Mags
-
MAG,
great work so far !!!
beautifully neat looking breadboard btw, my breadboard circuits look like a plate of spaghetti thats been chucked onto the floor and re-arranged by a spider thats tripping on acid ! ( yes, they are THAT bad )
as a way of testing efficiency ( and of course wether or not youre approaching OU )... could you try the following...
charge up a large'ish FARAD cap to say youre standard 5V...use this as your input supply....
on the output use another large ( preferably larger ) cap... run the circuit until the input cap is empty... you will know how many joules you have used on the input from
E = 1/2 x C x (V^2)
now simply measure voltage on output cap and again use the same formula to give you joules of energy on the output. ( you may need to use quite a large cap on the output so that it doesnt fill up completely before the input cap is all used up )
cant wait to see what the results are.
interesting that the caps on both input and out output circuitry have such a beneficial effect, i tend to aggre with you that are adding "bounce"..and each time it bounces youre output coil is picking up the changes in flux.
p.s re:- casting cores, 1 more advantage to casting your own is that it enables you to place either the input coil or the output coil (or both )... actually INSIDE the core...as opposed to simply "around" the core .....this 'might' allow more flux-change absorbation in the windings? not to mention of course that doing it this way the outside of your inner toroid would be a nice standard size & shape as opposed to being bumpy & irregular by having wire wrapped around it ( the wires would now be tucked away inside the core itself ). Obviously if you were going to do this, the coils would have to be pre-wound beforehand..then placed into the space in the mould and then the magnetite goop poured into the space.
Oh, 1 last thing, you should be able to get black magnetite ( FE 304 ) from art shops ( possibly craft shops too ), they use it as a pigment, should work out somewhere along the lines of $7-8 per KG roughly speaking.
-
@Magluvin,
Great work but please try to post a little smaller images.
(I did scale you images down 50%).
Regards,
Groundloop.
-
Sorry about that. Im not sure why it came out like that. But this is much better.=]
Thanks
Mags
-
Ossie Callanan demonstrated his coil wrapped bailing wire strand toroid coil and simple electric drill winding techniques on three new youtube videos. Imagine a bifilar pancake coil wrapped this way. When the wraps reach the end, they just need to go back the other way and cover the first winding. Now, if the wire and copper coils are twisted into a spiral, both ends of the copper coils come out the same side of the pancake. This would make a great flux modulator sandwiched between two tube magnets, or in the middle of a stack of disk Neos. Also, one on each side of the center magnet in a five cube Hallbach array would switch the unidirectional field on and off. allowing for a high torque attraction motor, or endless MEG configurations. This pancake coil would lay flat, and permit maximum surface area to contact, unlike the hole through the toroid, which provides the magnets a way to combine strength. This seems like an ideal flux trigger for Bruce's FOMEGA! Tesla patented just such a bifilar pancake coil. I could never figure out what kind of application he had intended for it. Perhaps it was the same.
-
Well some small progres on SS orbo. I have purchased Elmer's Fiberglass resin. It is with me.
Next I ordered online, 10 lbs. of FINE Black Iron Oxide powder.
Next, I ordered online, 1 lb of.....are you ready for my secret ingredient? LOL
ACTIVATED CHARCOAL Powder! I will mix a small bit of this with my iron oxide, and this get's mixed with my resin. I will then use this to build my "bars" of super flux increasing nano particles. or SFINPO for short. These will then be used to build the FOMEGA as posted. I already have some tremendous coils ready as pick ups. I will post vids of my build of course. ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.energyfreedomreport.com
-
BRUCE , hoooray!!!!
are you going to cast the coils INTO the cores or wrap them around the cores?
-
I tested a copper wire coil wrapped steel wire spiral pancake coil today. I sandwiched the spiral between two ring magnets N and S facing each other. The magnets were both attracted by the hay wire core in between. When the copper magnet coil wraps were energized by a short 12 V charge, the magnets continued to cling, not to the steel core, but by mutual attraction. When placed in proximity to a larger stack of ring magnets, the sandwich demonstrated a marked repulsion when charged. This proves that the wire coil pancake trigger links the flux between the ring magnets on each side when charged, and nullifies it when inert.
-
I have received in all of my casting ingredients. Elmers fiberglass resin, iron oxide powder and activated charcoal. I am simply a bit stymied because I have yet to be able to saturate my metglass toroid. I am now trying LarryC's idea which is to wind a secondary, short the secondary, and then wind the primary on top. I NOW also believe that Steorn had a hidden secondary under their primary. When I get this toroid to saturate and lose it's magnetic attraction, I will be ready to roll.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
This is off topic, but I got an idea for a new motor. Imagine a stack of magnets behind the spiral flux blocker for a stator, and a stack of rings on the rotor in polarity opposition. The rotor magnets would be attracted to the metal in the spiral core as they came around, then when they hit the sticky spot, the copper wire wraps would be energized, not just to eliminate the attraction, but to expose the rotor magnets to the full opposition force of the stack hidden behind the flux blocker spiral. This is an Orbo with a high tourque booster. I think I'll move ahead and try and build this one.
-
Hi Mags,
I have a question for you and wrote that question on your picture that I am reposting. I look forward to your answer... ;)
Thanks!
Bruce
http://www.energyfreedomreport.com
-
Hey Bruce
The coil under the toroid is the pickup coil, if I remember 60 turns gave 2 layers. The toroid is wrapped till the inside of the bead is covered without overlapping or crossing so the 1/4 in mags fit inside.
The green one is finer wire as you see, and the pickup there is 150 turns 3 layers and also just enough toroid windings to just layer the inside once. Hope that helps
I tried the pickup on the outside of the toroid but this works better for some reason. The choice of how thick the pickup coils plus the toroid is just enough to fit snug in the outer cores with a layer of black tape.
Mags
-
Hi Mags,
Thank you. You may want to revisit the idea of the magnet in the center of the toroid. I do not think the Toroid will fully saturate with the magnet in the center. Perhaps the "pick up" wrapped around the circumference was transforming from the toroidal winds. It is 90 deg I know, but have seen stranger things.
You may want to go back to our idea of using the toroid as a flux gate/diode and use the JLN Labs test first to make sure that your are fully Saturating your core. Also, I would stongly suggest wrapping a secondary, and shorting it, and wrapping your primary over top of that. That info is found in the main Steorn thread, as posted by LarryC.
@ All
I have just ordered my magnets for this build. They were expensive...LOL but I have high hopes for this build. I also want to repost this drawing based on an inventor's design that works.
I am going to begin to build my Nanoparticle Iron Oxide beams, this week. I have sized my blueprint and am ready to build my molds. I will youtube it, of course.
IMHO the key to making this work, is going to be understanding the IMPORTANCE of the airgap in our form, and sizing for that correctly. .03" or .8 mm. And also a second key is going to be tuning the pickup coil to it's resonant frequency, according to Szabo.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.energyfreedomreport.com
-
Hey Bruce
The drawings above are what gave me the idea of the Orbonbon. When the toroid coil is NOT energized, the magnets poles make a path through the inner bead, and when energized, they are forced to find a new path through the outer bead, then back again as the toroid is de energized. This puts the path of the magnets field alternating inside then outside of the pickup coil producing AC, of which I thought would be better than just on then off like in the drawings you show above. My brain just works like that. =]
Mags
-
@bruce_TPU I wound my original Orbo toroids with 0.5mm 24bs. http://jaycar.com.au/productResults.asp?FORM=KEYWORD Tried posting a pic but it was unreadable. Also I used Ossie's method of winding on 3 strands at a time to a shuttle device. I simply used a hard flexible piece of plastic with a V cut in each end to first wind the wire onto then did about 3 layers (ferrite cores) & wired them in series. I used EXACTLY the same toroids as Ossie. http://jaycar.com.au/productView.asp?ID=LO1234&CATID=33&form=CAT&SUBCATID=882
-
Hey Bruce
In earlier posts, I reported that the coil interaction alone, without mags, were pretty low. With just the inner bead, not inside the outer bead, the voltage on the secondary was like 2v, and when inside the outer beads, it was up to 3v but not much current. So the magnets fields I believe are doing as I figured, switching beads as the inner bead is doing a disappearing and reappearing act. =]
mags
-
@bruce_TPU I wound my original Orbo toroids with 0.5mm 24bs. http://jaycar.com.au/productResults.asp?FORM=KEYWORD Tried posting a pic but it was unreadable. Also I used Ossie's method of winding on 3 strands at a time to a shuttle device. I simply used a hard flexible piece of plastic with a V cut in each end to first wind the wire onto then did about 3 layers (ferrite cores) & wired them in series. I used EXACTLY the same toroids as Ossie. http://jaycar.com.au/productView.asp?ID=LO1234&CATID=33&form=CAT&SUBCATID=882
Hi Jimboot,
So your .5mm is indeed about 24 awg. How many turns total, or if you don't know that, what was the total length? (of all wires in series total) Thanks!!
I will know shortly if my newly wrapped magamp works, and if not, I am ordering Ossies and your core from Jaycar. I just need to know about how much wire, or turns.
Hey Bruce
In earlier posts, I reported that the coil interaction alone, without mags, were pretty low. With just the inner bead, not inside the outer bead, the voltage on the secondary was like 2v, and when inside the outer beads, it was up to 3v but not much current. So the magnets fields I believe are doing as I figured, switching beads as the inner bead is doing a disappearing and reappearing act. =]
mags
Hi Mags,
I certainly believe you, it simply would appear from looking at your toroid, and know the hell I have had getting any of mine to properly saturate that you have so few turns. You might consider rewinding another, with a shorted layer as per LarryC. Then your pick up coil, and then a lot of turns. And then try JLN Labs test to make sure a magnet wont stick to the outside when it is switched on. I just think that it will help your results mightily! ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hey Bruce
Wouldnt the shorted coil absorb some of the field that Im trying to get my pickup to absorb?
Maybe I misunderstand what the shorted coil is for. If you think it will enhance the pickup, I will try it.
At this time with the cores that I have, I am limited to space on the inner bead for more windings than are there now. Each of the beads in the pic you have noted have the same wire size for the pickup and the toroid. The one on the left is maxed out for size. Do you think if I used smaller wire for the pickup, that I would still get good current output? I have wound quite a few to get to this point. =]
Mags
-
Syncro
Have you seen Tinselkoala's YT vid on the Orbette where he applies biasing magnets to the toroids to get the rotor to go faster?
Mags
-
Bruce
Also I am running 5v to the toroid coil, which makes a difference from 1.5v. Maybe the Orbo could do better with higher volts also. =]
Mags
-
Magluvin.
Thank you for referring me to Tinselkoala's latest Biased Magnets Orbette Video number 51. Looks like TK has really outdone himself in this one. His results are truly astonishing! RPMs increase about 50% while input power drops. Excellent proof of concept demo for that idea.
Bruce,
What kind of material do you plan to use to cast your stator in? Wax or green sand?
-
Syncro
It may be a good thing to bias the stators here. I dont have an orbo setup at the moment, but if you try, check to see if the input current changes with or without. I have in the past posted that if you have a small dc motor and add neos to the ouside casing, the motor runs faster, but at the expense of input current rise. But the orbo function may not be the same and hopefully the input remains the same.
Mags
-
Magluvin.
Thank you for referring me to Tinselkoala's latest Biased Magnets Orbette Video number 51. Looks like TK has really outdone himself in this one. His results are truly astonishing! RPMs increase about 50% while input power drops. Excellent proof of concept demo for that idea.
Bruce,
What kind of material do you plan to use to cast your stator in? Wax or green sand?
Hi Synchro,
Actually neither... :-) Wood form, using 1/4 round, for mold, rubbed down in vaseline. It will work just fine. I just need my toroid to saturate. Added more winds, but still not enough.... So, I keep winding. I may have to wind until the hole is filled. But all magnets are ordered. But instead of building my forms, each evening I wind my toroid and test and wind some more.
Perhaps I need more current? I have about 2 amps coming in off of the bread board, at 5 volts.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
Your right Bruce. I am not saturating the core. Hmmm. Its funny. I wonder how the toroid in the graphics pics you posted can possibly work with such few turns, or is it just a simple representation to show the basic idea.
Well what I will have to do is go through the cores I have and guesstimate enough room for mags while expecting some thickness of the windings. I am going to have to rethink my order on the new cores. Maybe I can make them work somehow. And if I can get good sat. maybe the pickup outside will work better.
Man, if I am getting output as good as I am without saturation, then with it, I should be getting some huge increase.
I dont want to get too excited yet, but it does seem so. Ive Been disappointed many times before, cant hurt much. Im thinking a few separate windings that tap out, using thin wire, and it will give me the option of series or parallel, or trying singles. Ive wound many and I just want to make this one variable in hopes of finding the goods in a single shot.
Thanks for bringing this to light Bruce. Im not always a fast learner. =] But Ive got a solid foundation going now.
Mags
-
Ok I worked all night, at work, and was thinking and thinking, and now im home and Im gunna rap, err wrap umm windum up and sew me a wet toroid, err saturated. Im all silly from no sleep an im not goin to bed yet.
I got me a few more toroid cores from some pc power supplies so I have a few more choices for a victim.
Man I hope this works. Maybe Ill take a few more punches. Bip bap.
Will report in a few.
Mags Orbominator Orbonbon on Toroids =]
-
Half way done. The pickup coil is only 18 turns of 2 layers of 9 , 22ga. The toroid winding is 30ga and this is just the first to tap out. 1 more layer of the same and she will just fit the outer core I have chosen.
The magnet will be a 1/2 x 3/8 N52. This is tedious work. Having 2 separate toroid windings allows a little flexibility to connect series or parallel to see what works best.
Mags
-
ebeautifully neat winding mags !
cant wait to see more of your inovative tests on video
-
Thanks Rave
Something I had not tried nor gave much thought til Bruce TPU was getting the core to saturate. I dont know why I hadnt tested for this before. I had seen the dropping mag tests, but didnt think much of the differences there could be. But thanks to Bruce, it has my full attn. now. Hopefully it will drop a mag when Im done. =] If it does, Im scared to see what the output might be. :o
My first Orbon I used the 30ga red on the toroid coil and was getting 160v out on the green wire 150 turn pickup on the core that I had re wrapped the toroid coil to the green 26ga and only got about 30v. So now It should be grand. The pickups, as I use less turns, have less volts but higher current out. So if this thing with 18 turns only puts out 10v, the current should be massive compared to what I had before, if I reach saturation or even closer to it than previously.
Mags
-
Hi Mags,
Okay, you have inspired me! LOL I had to wind this last night. The first Pic is of all of my taps... I wound them with STRANDED magnet wire... I think it will make a differance. Also, I have three taps. Second pic is with 26 awg magnet wire wound over top. I am going to try this before winding some more layers. Home computer has BAD virus, so will post as I can...
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
This is weird. I now have good magnet drop, but nill on output. I have to check my board. I dont believe I have changed anything doing tests on other stuff.
Do ya think that maybe the 30ga and so many wraps is affecting my output on the pickup? Maybe I have to change the timing cap for lower freq.
I have been up since yesterday, and i was all eager to do this today. Maybe Im just tired and dont know what Im doing. lol
Man I spent a long time working on this winding to get the most so everything would fit well.
My other 2, yellow and green beads wouldnt drop a mag at 12v. It would shudder, but no drop. This one dropped at 5v and thats (5v) what I have been running on all my stuff ive been testing lately with the sig gen since I made it.
I can hear the freq from the coil, louder than I have heard from the others. I was even able to hear the Agentgates coil, except for stuff over 15khz. The coils are not good tweeters. =]
My pickup is only 18 turns but i should get something, 2v, whatever. Maybe Im dreaming. :-\
Im going to take a lil break and check things out after a bit. Ive been at it since this morning.
Mags in Didney Lan
-
MAG, enjoy the rest, it'l do ya good and im sure once youve gone over the circuit with a fresh brain & a fine toothcomb youll figure it out
Kudos for your efforts ( dont even ASK what im doing with my rodin coil lol ! )
-
Hey Bruce
I hope you have better luck today than me. Ill get back on it in a lil bit. My back is aching. =]
Rave
Ok I wont ask.
So what are you doing with that rodin coil? =]
Mags break
-
Well, its not the circuit. I put old Orbonbon in and she works. Man, how disappointing.
Maybe the pickup need be on the outside of the toroid coil with this many turns on the toroid.
I have another core i had made before using 26ga for the toroid winding and quite a few turns on the pickup under it that I named OrboMcMuffin and it at least put out a descent output. Not like the yellow wire Orbon which is the best, and still not like the green one.
The major difference with this new one, other than the large no. of toroid turns is, the length from pole side to pole side. Its only about 1/2 in, where Orbon is over an inch at about 3/4 dia., and the new one is over an in. in dia.
the OrboMcMuffins is the same dia ans the new one but twice as long, using 2 cores together to make 1.
One more difference was the no. of pickup turns. The new one I went with 18 turns, where the yellow Orbon is 60 and the green is 150. The 150 put out more volts but less current, and the yellow was less voltage than the green but more current. So I had figured that if I went with 18 turns here, and the yellow produces up to 30v, If I got only less than 10v, but hoped for more current. I do get 1.5 to 2.5v on the new one at and area of particular freq, but very little current. So I see it as the worst of the bunch.
So, as for the comparison in the no. of windings of the toroid, so far less is better in this bunch until I see differently. Yellow Orbon holds the title of Bonbon extraordinaire. I cant seem to predict things with it yet. I had very high hope for this one. Still on a learning curve.
mags
-
MAG, if you find time, could you post a pic or two of the old coils with the new one next to it, so we can guage the differences, ot include this in your next video whenever that will be.
re- Rodin coil, ive designed & built ( with help ) a circuit that is controlled by a PIC32 micro controller, basically the software ive written turns the whole thing into a programmable signal generator, im pulsing the rodin with a series of 6 pulses..
1V, 2V, 4V, 8V, 7V, 5V ..& repeat..with control over frequency & length of each individual pulse via the software.
i just had an idea that you could try that would spped up the process of finidng sweet spots in terms of the frequency. However it would be limited to a maximum of 20KHz.
instead of using your 555 circuit, you could use one of the freely available sound card sig gens into an opto and onto a transistor....and simply set the software to "sweep"..and observe the input/output while its sweeping thrugh the freq's.
-
MAGs,
just ahd another idea,
instead of winidng both your coils ( pickup coil & pulsed coil ) around an ACTUAL ferrite toroid core.. how about this...
get some of that soft iron / steel wire....it would have to be coated of course, and wind the pickup coil ( the one that is wound round & round the circumference ) around a ferrite toroid....then.....REMOVE the toroid.. then...wind the pulsed coil around the pickup coil treating the pickup coil as if its the actual "core"....which it would be since its made of iron......the pickup coil would be both the coil AND the core at the same time.
-
Hey rave
I have to go to work but here is a pic of all items together.
I will be back this afternoon.
Mags
-
Thanks mag, that helps put it all into perspestive some.
-
While I was working, I had some thoughts. I have a few more computer cords around to get a couple more beads from. I dont want to take the first 2 working ones apart to keep as a reference.
What I was thinking is, these 2 cannot be the best there can be, not off the whim. So Im going to combine what I know about these 2 and try some different configs with the windings and compare. I dont have anything down to a science so try and test is the best I can do till I have some variations to go by. 2 is not enough. But going with what works for now is the best bet.
If I have 4 different ones, I should be able to get a handle on which direction to go from there to get closer to what is better.
Mags
-
Some more thoughts.
In the beginning, when I had seen the flux gate Bruce had posted with the toroid on the left and the pickup on the right with a gap, I thought, wow, what a great idea. But now i have to question.
The amount of energy it takes to get the toroid to saturate, is it equal to or more than the energy produced by gating the flux of a mag?
The only way to find out is to use a magnet that, while conducting flux through the toroid, is able to saturate the toroid core also. If it is any weaker, we are failing to reach full potential. If it is stronger, will the flux from the magnet overcome the toroids field we are trying to saturate the core with?
My Orbon is just a simple idea to try and produce the generating effect of flux switching. Nothing calculated, just try to fit what I got and see what haps.
Can it be that the end result can only ever be under 100% efficiency, like many other devices?
All in all, Im happy that the idea of it works at all. And I cannot discount it yet from the little that I have done.
A circuit that I messed with last week, a switching ps type, pulsing a Big coil and the bemf is captured off the coil, I had made a vid of the output burning a light bulb. Vid below, and please read the info there on my errors. The errors were why I had not posted it, but now I am and will do a new vid here soon with corrections and findings
I am going to revisit, as Bruce would say, this setup. I see some interesting things here that I need to find out what was going on with the in and out connecting. But in the setup, when I put the 5ohm res on the output, it was very close to the total watts of what the 5v 1a ps could put out. Under 100% but pretty close. But I need to find out why only 30v without the in/out connection and 60v with.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5uJL--N_qo
Mags
-
Hello ALL,
I have spent the evening working on my forms for my homemade nanoparticle iron oxide flux multiplier beams... LOL (See pictures below) I am not going to mold them up until Saturday when I have some real time. I am going to video the process as well.
The virus is off of my computer after much work, but it damaged some of my registry I think.
@ Mags
I wound my coil with the taps, but it needs far more winds to be added. I have a pulser being made that I will be using to experiment with our SS orbo and also with the orboton.
I did fool with it a bit, using my rotor and relay as switch. The magnets sure hummed a pretty note, but it needs more winds and a real pulser.
Lastly I would caution you and others experimenting with this, to only use an analog meter for measuring voltage, or scope. Digital multimeters are pretty much useless for this type of research.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHhZihBbmFs
ok figured it out. Tricky tricky. =]
Mags
-
Hello ALL,
I received in yesterday, my magnets for this build!
Two (2) 1/2" x 2" N42 Magnets and Two (2) 1/2" x 1".
I was too sick today from either stomach virus or food poisoning to do any work on this. Wasted the whole day in bed. I hope tomorrow to start working on my flux forms.
I still need a toroid that will saturate. Regardless of what anyone says, the Magamp is not it for me at this time.
I ordered all the way from AUS the same one as used by Ossie and Jimboot that was successful. With the exact same wire as they used. When it arrives, I will be ready to roll.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
@Bruce-TPU: Sorry to hear about your flu like symptoms. My first thought is that they may have been caused through contact with the highly toxic materials you're working with. You may have inhaled particulate matter or resin fumes or absorbed them through your eyes or skin pores. My advice to you is to purchase a box of disposable latex gloves, a painters mask with filter and eye goggles. Avoid any and all exposure to those chemicals. You can find all this safety equipment at your local hardware store for little cost.
-
@Bruce-TPU: Sorry to hear about your flu like symptoms. My first thought is that they may have been caused through contact with the highly toxic materials you're working with. You may have inhaled particulate matter or resin fumes or absorbed them through your eyes or skin pores. My advice to you is to purchase a box of disposable latex gloves, a painters mask with filter and eye goggles. Avoid any and all exposure to those chemicals. You can find all this safety equipment at your local hardware store for little cost.
LOL, I don't think so. Activated charcoal is perfectly safe, and I have not yet unwrapped the iron oxide. Just a stomach virus, but feeling a bit better today.
@ ALL
This is exactly what we are working to do, from JLN labs. The differance is he is fully saturating his toroid. I know that is an issue. Also, think three dimensionally. a magnet on both sides and two more pick up coils. Pick up coils everywhere... LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjDbIrKIVXs
This is the EXACT premise... only a certain amount of power is used to switch the toroid. So, we switch the toroid and oscillate the flux. Back to what we are trying to build.
I have ordered a different toroid. Tonight I glue (special movable type of glue) and tape up my forms.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
@Bruce, Glad you're feeling better. Thanks for the new JLN video link. Awesome, fascinating new definitive proof of concept video from JLN. He's pulsing at 200 Hz, oscillating frequency of magnetism estimated to be 159 Hz. Has anyone checked out the "EMF Safety Superstore" Goggle pulls up the link. Finemet and Metglass fabrics and sheet metal rolls. I found the ideal Mu-Metal wire I've been searching for. High nickel content.They maintain it can be twisted, braided, shaped into toroids and of course spirals. Two different thicknesses. A fine flux blocker core, with good attraction, high permeability and ductability for fashioning custom shaped easily wound cores. They won't ship abroad, so it's out of reach for me right now down here in Panama, but it's well worth having a look at this site.
-
Evening ALL,
Forms are now glued, taped and measured. Ready for the mixture. You gotta love popsicle sticks and small scrapers for they are next to be used.
It looks ugly, but there is a purpose to my madness...Blue tape is "painter's tape" and very easy to peel up. Glue stick is "restickable". The forms have to be able to be removed when my nanoparticle flux bars dry! ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
Hello ALL,
JLN Labs has posted a lot more information and advise about his SSGen experiments, as well as another video. It is at the bottom of the page, here:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energyfreedomreport.com
-
Hello ALL,
JLN Labs has posted a lot more information and advise about his SSGen experiments, as well as another video. It is at the bottom of the page, here:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm
Cheers,
Bruce
Thanks Bruce...Amazing! Someone should perform the above
experiment inside a largish iron or ferrite cavity. Maybe
formed out of 8" piping hardware or something similar. Also
with a hefty L + C lowpass filter spliced into the DC supply
lines.
:S:MarkSCoffman
-
Hi folks. This is my first post after lurking around here for the past couple of years. I must say that am really impressed by the quality and intellect of the people here. This thread has really caught my attention. I’d like to say – Nice Work Groundloop for kicking this thread off!
Earlier in this thread I read several posts regarding finding the correct resonant frequency for the input. With that in mind, I wonder if it might be possible to take the ac from the output and use it to pulse the input torroids. Assuming of course that we could get the frequency correct. It would in effect create a self running generator (which is what we are all chasing after).
I can’t help but notice the similarity between what that would look like and one of Steven Marks TPU’s. I can’t find a great picture of it on the net, but I attached what I could find. Every time I see this video I am struck by what appear to be probably four magnets placed about the circumference of the device. After watching the video again, I now notice the heavy copper wire which is probably the pickup coil. Could it be that what Steve Marks made is very similar to what is developing here? I have no doubt whatsoever that Steve Marks covered up components and added extra useless components to throw people off the track. Also I have no doubt that Steve Marks disinformed and misinformed people about the fundemental workings of his tpu’s. I may be totally wrong, but I think that the tpu in the attachment might be a meg with the output coils pulsing the input coils as mentioned above. It’s possible that what is discovered here might be the key to the tpu secret.
I just thought I would throw this out to the group as nobody has said anything. I see an obvious parallel to at least on of the tpu’s. Thanx for reading.
James
-
James,
Welcome to the forum. I actually agree with you, there are many people
that is doing great research right now. And I'm sure that some day we
will break the free energy barrier. The fact that a little toroid can shield
a magnetic field was a great eye opener for me personally.
Groundloop.
-
Thanx Groundloop. This thread has inspired me to get off of my backside and start winding. I have a great deal of experience with test equipment. As soon as I fix my pulse generator I'll be able to start testing and sharing my results.
James,
Welcome to the forum. I actually agree with you, there are many people
that is doing great research right now. And I'm sure that some day we
will break the free A barrier. The fact that a little toroid can shield
a magnetic field was a great eye opener for me personally.
Groundloop.
-
Thanx Groundloop. This thread has inspired me to get off of my backside and start winding. I have a great deal of experience with test equipment. As soon as I fix my pulse generator I'll be able to start testing and sharing my results.
Hi James,
Welcome indeed! We always need more builders and less talking heads on this forum... LOL
@ ALL
I have mixed my first batch of mad scientist ingredients for my nanoparticle flux bars (and I did wear a mask and gloves, cause that fiberglass stinks!)
But, I kinda messed up the first forms. I did not fill all of them, but the ones I did fill, I forgot... the VASELINE. You see, that is suppose to go into the forms (rubbed) first and then the mixture poured. It will be dry in less than two hours and I will know for sure. Also the mixture was a little thin I think. I weighed the iron oxide and other ingrdients, so redoing should be easy. I just need 6 or 7 tbs of fiberglass instead of the 8. Maybe. But the good news is that I have enough "stuff" to do this about 40 more times...LOL So in two hours I will know. ::) ;D
-
Hello ALL,
Well it is more than two hours and bars are not dry. I think that if it is not dry by the morning, I will need to change the order in which I mix the ingredients.
Tonight, I mixed first the iron oxide, and then my nanoparticles, and then my fiberglass epoxy, and last my hardener.
If they do not dry by morning, I will wash the forms off and mix again tomorrow in the following order: (and remembering to use vaseline on the forms for when they do dry...LOL)
Cup 1: I will mix iron oxide and nanoparticles
Cup 2: I will mix epoxy and hardener
I will then add cup 1 to cup 2 and mix. This will work!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.energyfreedomreport.com
-
I believe JLN could improve his SSorbo output by replacing the copper wire wound output coil with a cluster of crystal alternator diodes. The alternator generates current from the stretching and collapse of the intersecting rotation of the magnetic fields, and the crystal diode attracts and collects the power from this type of torsion better then anything. A ring of crystal diodes should attract and rectify power from a wider portion of the scalar wave. Another thing, I wonder if JLN could light more LED´S as we've seen demonstrated by our Joule thief experimenters, where hundreds of LED´S are connected and illuminated in series with no apparent rise in input power. I wonder also if his input would double if he doubled the wraps on his output coil, without increasing input. Broad spectrum power receiving antennas are currently under development by cell phone manufacturers. This kind of output receiver coupled with resonating toroids would yield a an infinity OU generator. The magnet appears to be an inexhaustible source of electric power, that's transformed into electricity, defying both the Lenz law and the second law of thermodynamics.
-
@ All,
I did a quick replication of JLN's 2SGen. It's cool. Here's my setup. I used the Ainsley circuit for the pulsing circuit. My Toroid is 28.3 mH on a Magnetics Core ZP-42507-TC wound with 22 AWG (uh-oh! didn't count wraps). My pick-up coil is 30 AWG, at 14.7 mH using two spools of Radio Shack magnet wire on a single spool bifilar style. The output circuit is basically the same as JLN's but I used a 1uF cap instead of 22uF (I haven't tried other values yet).
I've haven't gotten round to soldering the Ainsley circuit on GL's board yet, so I'm using an IRF630 for the Fet on a breadboard (ala Forest Mims III electronics board). I'm reading the Fet at 4.45 V before I hook up the toroid. At the output on the pickup coil, when it is unloaded I'm seeing 10.3 to 11.2 volts (tricky connection for 30 gauge wire). When the circuit is loaded with simple red LED's, the voltage levels off at 3.4 volts. I've hooked up as many as 3 LED's and the voltage seems steady at 3.4 volts. I would hook up more, but I just noticed the Fet is giving of that characteristic smell like it's going out. Needless to say, but it needs a heat sink.
The magnet I'm using is a 1/4 inch by 3 inch cylinder Neo. On my setup, I'm touching the magnet at the top of the toroid instead of at the bottom. When the magnet is touching the toroid, the LED's light up. When the magnet is not touching, the LED's turn off. Cool!!!
Edit: Put on a heat sink. Hooked up 10 LED's. They all lit up, but a little dim. When I adjusted the frequency to 20.95 kHz, the LED's got noticeably brighter. Something a little strange however... The Duty cycle is at 29.6%. When I try to adjust it higher, the LED's go out. Tested the output voltage, showing 4.36V on the scope.
-
Hello ALL,
Steven Mark once said that "there are some interesting characteristics of toroids, learn them. " Boy he sure wasn't kidding...
Please check out the latest from JLN Labs:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#moving
I am curious about this one, indeed... :o
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energryfreedomreport.com
-
Hello ALL,
Steven Mark once said that "there are some interesting characteristics of toroids, learn them. " Boy he sure wasn't kidding...
Please check out the latest from JLN Labs:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#moving
I am curious about this one, indeed... :o
Cheers,
Bruce
http://energryfreedomreport.com
I just tried that. When I use this huge 3" ring neo, the toroid would pull too much current. Another thing that I noticed was if I moved the magnet position around the toroid, I could get different output voltages. What I found for my setup is that placing the magnet on one of the sides(instead of top or bottom) of the toroid would get better output. What I thought was weird was changing the polarity of the magnet would also change the output. I tried placing a cap (2000uF) in parallel with the toroid but when I did I had to change the duty cycle(70%) and frequency (15 kHz) on the circuit to get the LED's to light up. I tried to get a small 3v motor to run, but just not enough current yet. This is fun!!!
Edit: I think I was reading the scope wrong on my previous post. The scope is showing 4.36V peak to peak (i think that's what that is). I'm a newbie when it comes to scopes. When I put a 2000uF cap on the output, the voltage rises to 5+ volts possibly more if I leave it there for a bit. Only enough current to run a little 3V motor for a fraction of a sec. One thing I can't figure out is when I try to measure the current on the LED's (with 1uF cap) the LED's turn off. Strange.
-
Hello Staffman,
I wonder what would happen if you wound a small air core toroid and did the same experiment. There would be no worry of hystersis because it is an air core. Might be fun.. We would love to see a pic also, pls... or vid.
Evening ALL,
Okay, tonight I have poured just one bar to see if this works. I did not change the ingredients, just the order in which they were mixed. I think it will make all the differance, or hope so.
I should know in about two hours...again. LOL
I used 126 g. of Iron Oxide and 6 g. of nanoparticles. My Nanoparticles have a surface area exceeding 5000 square feet per gram. So six grams give me 30,000 square feet of surface area. This is bound to have some impact on the flux handling ability of my bar according to my research...hehehe. We will see. I gotta get it into a bar though...first..LOL
If this bar gets hard, I will then make a youtube video on the next round.
Cheers,
Bruce
http:/EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Here are some pics of my 2SGen Replication attempt. I'm using the Ainsley circuit. I do have the PCB that GroundLoop built, but I have not had the time to solder everything together... I've got to get one of those big magnifying glasses first. I'm using an IRF630B for the Fet. I've also left out the Pots controlling the Fet to increase the current.
If I change the polarity of the magnet, the LED's dim. If I move the magnet to the other side of the toroid, the LED's are dimmer. (Maybe due to uneven wraps? No clue about the polarity issue.) I tried to get a pic of the dimmer LED's, but it didn't come out well - so I left it out.
The first picture shows my setup. The big thing is one of those Radioshack electronics kits from Forest Mims III. I like the little springs on the board, it helps with wiring things up. The circuit used is just the Ainsley circuit with the changes as described above.
The second pic shows the 2SGen. The toroid is 28.3 mH (Mag-Inc PN# ZP42507-TC) wound with 22 AWG wire (I really should count the wrappings). The pickup coil is 14.7 mH bifilar wound with approx 400 feet total of 30 AWG wire.
The third pic shows the scope shot of the input into the toroid from the output of the Ainsley circuit... yes I need to change the batteries... I've been having fun.
Fourth pic shows the input frequency.
Fifth pic shows the input duty cycle.
Sixth pic shows the scope shot of the output (loaded).
Seventh pic shows the 10 simple red LED's (low power type) being lit.
Eighth pic shows the scope shot of the output (loaded) where I reverse the polarity on the magnet. The LED's are noticeably dimmer, but I could not get a good pic.
There we go. I did try another pickup coil, but no luck. I haven't measured the specs for that crappy coil, but if anyone wants to know I can measure it for you. I think if I had a bigger coil, the output would be much higher.
-
Hello All,
I think that this bar tonight will work..! It is not completely hard...yet, but headed in the right direction. Tomorrow, I will take it out of it's mold (and yes I did use the vaseline) and sand it down nice and pretty!
I will show a pic when the first bar is done, and then time to make some more.... ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
@Bruce,
I built a cold molded sailboat with West Ways linear polyurethane and have some experience with the kind of epoxy and hardener your using: I can tell you the mixture determines the rate it kicks. If you mix a small portion with no extra ingredients included according to the recommended proportions, you will notice a thermal reaction followed by sudden hardening in around ten minutes. Mixed correctly, it heats up and kicks fast and hard! If it takes too long to kick, it never really gets hard. This is usually a result of not including enough hardener.
You need to buy extra hardener and mix more of it but not too much, or it will kick on you as you pour. The timing is real tricky to get the extra amount of hardener mixed and then add the extra ingredients. The extra hardener speeds the reaction up and the inclusion of extra ingredients slows it down. Also, if you add additional hardener, try not to stir the ingredients to rapidly, or you will over excite and prematurely trigger the reaction. Nice and steady. Optimally, it should kick fast and reach close to maximum hardness in under fifteen minutes, then entire hardness after a few hours.
-
Hello ALL,
AHH...the sweet victory of a small success...LOL Bar is hard as a rock! And I have already machined it down. I have a before and after picture for you all. Sands up real nice. It did take a few more drops of hardener, but the trick was in mixing the ingredients in the afore mentioned order!
My first Nanoparticle bar is complete and a success! PLEASE remember, it has a TOTAL surface area of OVER 30,000 square feet!!! ;D :D ;)
Time to make more.... ;) I will video it...LOL It is fun but messy!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
That looks very professional Bruce. Great Job.
GB
-
Naudins experiments on a solid state system have no significance unless data on input parameters (current, voltage, duty cycle) are provided, same for the output.
What's special about a system that transforms energy between inductances, even if it only works with magnets? It's not interesting until power output exceeds or is equal to power input.
-
Hello ALL,
You will want to check out the latest from JLN Labs. Now he is using a nanoperm core...!
Click the link and scroll down the newest part!
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#moving
Tonight I completed another 4" nanoparticle flux bar and a 1" bar. Video'd it, I just need to splice with some new software I bought. Tomorrow I will sand and file them.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hello ALL,
AHH...the sweet victory of a small success...LOL Bar is hard as a rock! And I have already machined it down. I have a before and after picture for you all. Sands up real nice. It did take a few more drops of hardener, but the trick was in mixing the ingredients in the afore mentioned order!
My first Nanoparticle bar is complete and a success! PLEASE remember, it has a TOTAL surface area of OVER 30,000 square feet!!! ;D :D ;)
Time to make more.... ;) I will video it...LOL It is fun but messy!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
WOW Bruce the bar came out great looking! I can't wait to see what it can do! Also thanks for posting the updated info JLN link
-
Naudins experiments on a solid state system have no significance unless data on input parameters (current, voltage, duty cycle) are provided, same for the output.
What's special about a system that transforms energy between inductance's, even if it only works with magnets? It's not interesting until power output exceeds or is equal to power input.
JLN is doing much more then transferring power between inductances. He is generating power with a magnetic field flip between the outside and inside of the Nanoperm toroid. This would require the rotation of a bar magnet past the output coil to accomplish normally. The startling difference in JLN's 2SGen is that there is no Lenz drag nor loss to resistance.
-
JLN is doing much more then transferring power between inductances. He is generating power with a magnetic field flip between the outside and inside of the Nanoperm toroid. This would require the rotation of a bar magnet past the output coil to accomplish normally. The startling difference in JLN's 2SGen is that there is no Lenz drag nor loss to resistance.
How would you know that? Even in usual transformers the magnetic core is saturated and then polarized in the other direction - going through a hysteresis loop. Power is not generated but transferred. And isn't induction the very basis of inductive coupling? Lenzs law gives only information about the direction of the induced voltages/currents.
The only difference to a usual transformer is the magnet. Again, to make this interesting he needs to deliver data. I hope he does not stop after a qualitative test like on his Orbo motor but also does quantitative tests.
-
Just some thoughts.
-
Hello ALL,
Okay, here it the much awaited "how-to" video for my Nanoparticle Flux Bars...LOL I worked hard on this vid, so please rate it if you like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnY1Zbi7sgM
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
@all
Two idea , use a cylinder neo around the pickup coil , one with with one polarity one the inside the other on the outside.
Second idea would be to use a cream cone shape magnet , the gauss is concentrated at the tip , i think this is what magnacoster is doing.
I would use soft iron for the core for the pickup coil , I may be possible to salvage some from electromagnet , the quality of the iron is important.
Also the ferrite toroid should be used on its side so the pickup core could be under the magnetic influence at both ends.
I wonder if a pot core would work ...
Anyway keep the good work everyone.
Mark
-
Afternoon ALL,
As I continue my methodical build of my SSG1 Solid State Generator v.1. My bars are filed and sanded. Toroid is picked up at the Post Office on Monday and now I work on an improved circuit for my Steorn Magnet Motor.
@ Alex
If you would like me to make you a toroid using my unusual ingredients, I gladly will, if you would like to test it and post the results. My treat! Just tell me the size that you would like, or a bar or both.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Afternoon ALL,
As I continue my methodical build of my SSG1 Solid State Generator v.1. My bars are filed and sanded. Toroid is picked up at the Post Office on Monday and now I work on an improved circuit for my Steorn Magnet Motor.
If you don't mind, I'd like to suggest some modifications.
The air gap should be on the core side (both top and bottom), and it is necessary. Without it you will find that the core will never "disappear" completely or it will consume a lot of current. You can also make the gap variable, because there will be a tradeoff, which you can find only by experimenting.
I don't see any need of air gap on the pickup side. You want all flux to flow into the pickup for max output. I wonder why you put it there.
Edit: Now I see the need of this gap. See below posts.
Second, the core should be completely wound. This will reduce input current, and as the core must not touch the poles, there is no point leaving that space without copper.
All the best, and keep posting those vids. :)
-
One more.
This will double the reluctance for same amount of current.
.
-
....
I don't see any need of air gap on the pickup side. You want all flux to flow into the pickup for max output. I wonder why you put it there.
....
Hi,
I think you have to use some air gap at the pickup side too, and it also needs experimentation how big gap is optimal. I say this because with no gap at all at the pickup side, the flux from the permanent magnet will always prefer staying towards the pickup side and not readily change towards the toroid side, just because the reluctances strongly differ.
Just try the setup, close the magnetic path on the pickup coil side as shown by you and THEN try to close the path on the left hand side: even with no airgap at all you will find the toroid will be hardly attracted when its coil is off and even less attracted when its coil is ON to saturate the toroid.
I say these because I recall my tests on a Flynn parallel path setup where I found a similar behavior I described (I know the differences between this setup and the parallel path setup, but those differences do not matter from flux changing path points of view).
rgds, Gyula
-
One more.
This will double the reluctance for same amount of current.
.
Now this is a much better situation indeed, I like it! Thanks.
Gyula
-
How would you know that? Even in usual transformers the magnetic core is saturated and then polarized in the other direction - going through a hysteresis loop. Power is not generated but transferred. And isn't induction the very basis of inductive coupling? Lenzs law gives only information about the direction of the induced voltages/currents.
The only difference to a usual transformer is the magnet. Again, to make this interesting he needs to deliver data. I hope he does not stop after a qualitative test like on his Orbo motor but also does quantitative tests.
Review JLN's 2sGen videos again. He points out that it's necessary to reduce the magnet strength to get the Flip. What he's referring to is more accurately defined as Propagated Domain Flipping and is a function of magnetic viscosity or lag time. His new project 2Sgen dual appears to have an oscillating coupling, that has the potential of reducing input to a very low draw.
-
Here is an alternative to Orbonbon, but it still produces AC out by switching the toroids on alternately.
Mags
-
Here is a vid of orbonbon producing output from the pickup coil and capturing bemf from the Tcoil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nv3P_jNAUM
just posted so it may not be fully processed for clean viewing yet.
Mags
-
Nice video again as usual mag,
agreed the possibilities of configuration are almost endless, throw in the range of frequencies & duty cycles and the permutations become so large its hard to know where to start.
i like your latest picture of a new orbonbon with the two toroids, should be interesting.
David. D
-
Hi,
I think you have to use some air gap at the pickup side too, and it also needs experimentation how big gap is optimal. I say this because with no gap at all at the pickup side, the flux from the permanent magnet will always prefer staying towards the pickup side and not readily change towards the toroid side, just because the reluctances strongly differ.
Yes, you have a point. I got that just after making my post.
Some gap on the pickup side is needed to control the flow on that path. Thanks.
-
Thanks again Rave. just uploaded another vid with slight variation in caps and freq and no. of magnets, and I increased output and decreased input some also. Need .55w to break though the barrier. Hmm thats 110 ma on the input. This run was about 850ma 5v in so if I can get it down to 750ma or output up some, I could say Unity.
I need to work on it. It has a pretty good freq range of operation, 100hz to over 10khz. It looks like between 5k to 10k will be the better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQn3d_j_Uko
Mags
-
Here are some improvements to the dual orbon.
The first pic is of the idea to have a path for the flux at the top of the magnets when the toroid is off. Just so it doesnt become attracted to the pickup coil core and interfere with the other magnets work.
Then thought that ferrite tubes around the mag would be neater and have a good path for the flux to terminate when the toriod is (not) on (or also not in use). The tubes are shown in Glass for a better view of the magnets.
Mags
Edit the words in par. are not correct for what I wanted to say. So read around them. I was dizzy for a bit. =]
-
One more.
This will double the reluctance for same amount of current.
.
This pic you show is good. I am finding that the longer the core is, the better chance of breaking the field. So making 2 breaks will ensure a good break but just might make a weaker connection also. Will have to be tested. This is why I show the longer ferrite beads in my 3D pic. One other change I might make to my version is longer mags also. But Im not as sure about that as I am with longer ferrite beads.
Your drawing is representative of what I came up with before these 3D renderings, as it had 4 toroids to make a complete field switch to the pickup coil, and I deduced it down to this. Its simple and should work well.
Mags
-
I
I don't see any need of air gap on the pickup side. You want all flux to flow into the pickup for max output. I wonder why you put it there.
The air gap is for a very good reason. If it were not there, when the toroid is in place and not powered, why would the flux bother leaving the favorable path? The gap provides enough break away to jump to the toroid when not powered, and when powered, the flux's favored path is that gap.
Mags
Edit By the way, Im not much in favor of the gaps either. Its just the way that config needs to be to work. In my config above the gaps are unnecessary. We are breaking the flux path at the magnet before any intersections. The gap probably work pretty good though. Most of the toroids I have seen are wrapped with enough wire that it creates a gap anyway. =]
-
@Mag,
I agree with air gap issue, as discussed in previous posts.
About the design with two break points, I realized that you can make a better connection by removing the air gap from the pickup side and making curved paths.
-
Thats a very good idea! And also if you have the gap as shown. it is very easily adjusted to see if its even needed.
But the curve thing is good for surface contact which I think is important.
On the orbon I have tremendous gaps on both sides from the poles to the outer core when the inner core is doing the hoky poky. Im working on getting the right stuff to break these barriers. I tried washes on the ends of the poles to help steer the fields inward, many things that I put a lot of thought into dont work as they might seem in the mind even after a bit of experience with it. But some things are making more sense now. So I hope my new one takes the cake for the plan. Its still Orbonbon style, because I think it will give more out than even the dual orbon I show above, due to Orbonbon is off for half of the cycle but produces the same output in the opposite direction due to actual flipping of the fields on the pickup instead of just on off. I think there is more to be had this way. The dual orbon just may do very well also with the cylinders around the mags to give the pole flux a path back instead of just flowering out when the tcoil is on.
But yep, very good way to to it there, I like the curves. Good job. The thinking is more than half of the work.
Ya know this can be done with square tube cores and just wind the 2 sides as needed and you will also have good contact surface to other cores. The field of the Tcoils need to come back to moma in the shortest path(toroid core or square tube core) and thats the path they will take.
One more thing, I believe that no mater how saturated the core is from the tcoil, I would have to say that a very powerful magnet can override this. So there will be a balance to deal with. I say this from experience. And I would like to see some short fat N52 mags drop at the same power as the mags that were used to demonstrate drop. One tcore wouldnt drop a 1/4 x 1/8 neo N35 or so, till I added weight to id like other cores but it had its drop weight. So for each different coil setup, the magnets will have to be selected to match the invisibility factor of the core to get optimum results.
This is just my theory of some things that I feel Im comfortable sharing as correct so far.
Mags
-
Here is a new core idea so they can be wound thick but maintain good contact with the connecting surface, as the wire turns create a gap that is unnecessary. I doubt this could be found premade. Will have to make one. =]
I just did few wire turns for effect, it would be hard to make many curved wires. But its to the point.
Mags
-
@Haithar & All:
I want to expand on the effect of Propagated Domain Flipping to explain my understanding of the principle behind JLN's 2SGen. Gravityblock has a video where he demonstrates this effect by pushing a neo disk magnet with a magnetized reel of magnetic tape on the Steorn thread. The disk is repelled until he exerts a little extra pressure, then the weaker field in the magnetic tape flips to align and attract the magnet disk. When this happens in the Nanoperm toroid, it sends a shock wave through the magnet field in the air gap between the toroid and the magnet in adjacency. This field oscillation is what generates the power in the output coils. There is no transformer inductance between the coil pulse and the output coil what so ever. All the power comes from the recoiling effect of the toroid field flip on the magnet field between the air gap inside the output coil air core. The coil pulse magnetizes the toroid, then the pulse attenuates in the off portion of the duty cycle. The toroid field begins to demagnetize at a rate that is a function of the material viscosity. When it weakens sufficiently, it's easier for the domains to flip and attract, then it is for them to continue to repel the stronger magnet. This is the big splash motion in the ocean that generates the power.
-
Good Evening ALL,
Well, I have some rough and dirty experimentation to share...
Last night, I finished winding another magamp, that still will not saturate, while waiting on my new toroid, same exact one and same wire as Ossie and Jimboot. It arrived today to Texas, from Australia.
Anywho, I also jazzed up my circuit a bit, thanks to Alex's great help. Well, last night, I placed my freshly wound, non saturating toroid into my SSG1, and placed the Brook Coil (my pick up coil) into the receiving end. I air gapped the top of the receiving end with one thickness of copy paper along with one thickness of card stock.
I spun the rotor by hand, not expecting anything to show up, when lo and behold, I spot .025 volts on the meter. With a resistance of 242.3 Ohms on my brooks, about .0001 for current. Next, I taped up the reed switch closer to the rotor and this boosted me up to .045 volts. I tried making a larger air gap, etc, nothing helped. Then, I added anothr stack of magnets wrapped in cork in pic with blue tape, and stuck it onto the toroid as seen in picture below. (added cork to protect it incase it attached to the magnet inside of my SSG1) Volts were now up to .097. Just some interesting things as I learn and optimize for when my REAL switching circuit is ready with a SATURATING toroid. I will keep you informed if I can boost it any more.
I DO like my Nanoparticle Flux Bars!!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
.150 volts now. I added a much larger magnet to the toroid as you can see in the pic below and it increased the voltage by 37.7%.
I will try to keep editing this post here through out the evening if I have any more increases. Again, this is simply by hand spinning the rotor as my switch frequency on my non saturating toroid.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
EDIT 1:
I placed a second pick up coil on the top Nanoparticle Flux bar... wired the two coils in series, giving me a resistance of 491 Ohms for total pickup coils and guess what...
Voltage is now at .300 ;) Not a lot, but I am getting all kinds of ideas, and of course the current stays the same to the toroid no matter what gets added or how many pick up coils...hehehe Time to add another...
EDIT 2:
After adding a third coil, the voltage dropped to .290 and now resistance was at 741 ohms for the three coils in series. So, from my calculations of I=E/R current dropped.
So, for my set up tonight, two works better. BUT, I still need to move the third coil to a different location on my SSG1 and see what happens.
On another odd node, the led I have hooked to the end, is flashing (faintly) nearly in tune with the LED on my board that I have to show me the mosfet is switching, showing indeed the flux is oscillating into the coils.
Lastly, I tried a different LED on the end, and the output voltage from my pickup coils dropped, nearly in half. Why would that be? So I put back onto the leads of the pickup coils the original LED.
-
Hey Bruce. How do the bars feel when attracted to the magnets?
I just did a vid that shows some things that may indicate using weaker magnets unless the path of conductivity is huge.
Im doing a second vid now on the same thing.
From a lot of stuff I have tried lately, Orbon has them beat. Luck was in the dice on that call, thats all I can say.
But try some weaker ferrite mags and see if there is a difference. Or even much smaller neos. Remember in my orbon the addition or subtraction of 1 1/8 in magnet from the stack and the output suffered. I started it with 2 3/4x1/2 in n52 on each end dwarfing the orbonbon. I got very high volts, 160 170v, but no current. But the little 1/4 in stack from Ace Hardware kicks butt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vj0PvRJssA
Mags
-
Bruce
if you have a chance, try using the toroid to block one end of the magnet from a bar. As in all in series. the toroid will be the gap, instead of each side fighting for flux, just break the path. Like the Dual Orbon.
Mags
-
Hey Bruce. Now Im nag. =]
I just noticed the pvc pipe there, are you thinking what Im thinking?
Make the circuit out of pvc as desired, load the pvc with ferropoxy, and bang bang, no sanding. =] All fully fused
The problem I have with the gap theory, we loose a tremendous amount of concentration with bit by bit increase in gap distance, so we get expensive magnets to overcome it. If the right magnet or to say the proper circuit for a particular magnet is made with the Tcore as the gap only when powered, then all we have to worry about is the ability of the magnetic switch to work.
With pvc elbows and T's the craziest flux circuits could be easily had. =]
Mags ThinKs
mags
-
Ok, 3 more vids to finish off the last vid.
Im going to try the big magnets on the orbon yellow. I have not tried them on that one. I was getting the high voltage, but low current in the original. So maybe that means spiky, high freq welcome. Dunno. Got to get more beads like these for a Dual Orbon, I dont want to take these apart for it. The Green And The Yeller.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5FUaCivu0E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYrRCgUOZ38
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJJDZoytJ8E
Mags
Edit bug to big =] u and i are close.
-
S2Gen Episode 5: Towards more power with a new magnet/toroïd setup
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#more (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#more)
-
It seems that there is definetly something special happening here. Very good video.
-
Hello All,
Okay, this morning I feel like I have made some real progress "optimizing." I added a magnet on the other side of the toroid, and a small magnet inside of the toroid and the voltage went up. I then noticed that if I brought my first pick up coil close to the magnet, voltage went up, but if I moved all three close to the magnet that voltage went down.
I then realized that the magnetic fields in my pick up coils were opposing one another and when close, having an adverse affect...so.o.o ...I turned the last two pick up coils around...and WOW... what a difference! I am now up to 1.2 volts from the .045 where I started last night. Slow speed turn of the rotor (my switching for my circuit right now) give me .8 volts.
I built this one based on the plans we worked up, and I must say that the flux is indeed increased by about a multiple of three. I have some other ideas to try tonight, and it is time for a video, I think. The Led lights up very well now. Again, remember, once I can put some real speed to this thing...hehehe!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
orbonbon and S2gen Same thing aint it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSgGFzfDiYE
Mags
-
Looks like the same thing, except JLN's magnets are are running across the toroid not through the axis. Diametrically magnetized cylinders running through the core would give you the same field alignment, I wonder if they would increase your output? You're definitely out in front, both with the magnets inside the toroid core and now with your BEMF pulse recovery loop.
-
MAGS & bruce..
GREAT work so far !!!!!!
-
Good evening ALL,
Well time to "optimize" some more.... ;) I had all day at work to think things through, and I decided first thing to begin to "remove" pieces and see what is really working, so that I can improve those things.
Well, the first piece I removed (because in my mind it didn't belong there!) was one of the magnets, and in doing so, my output voltage has JUMPED from 1.2 volts to 1.87 volts! Now, you may not think that a lot but percentage of total, it is huge! Please remember, this is simply using the hand turned rotor as a switch for my circuit for the time being. Optimize to the point I can do nothing else mechanically to improve things, and then I will add a "real" adjustable frequency and pulse width to see some real power. Those who know me, know I am very patient and methodical...
I will Edit this post as the evening warrants:
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
EDIT 1:
*Removed all magnets except for small one in center of toroid. Output voltage of SSG! was .9 volts
*Placed magnet on the opposite side of toroid, and voltage is now 1.93 volts...please see picture Revised Flux Path 3.
-
EDIT 2:
I have pulled off the bottom nanoparticle flux bar and the end piece. Please remember, that I am dealing with experimental bars and they do not behave like normal iron or steel! ;) ;D 30,000 square feet of surface area just in the one bar! (mad scientist laugh...hehehe!)
Voltage is now at 2 volts and I have all kinds of ideas now to increase that...
EDIT 3:
I have placed the magnet over the toroid side, and now I am at 2.2 output volts on the SSG1. Rotor switched!
See Revised Flux Path 5 below.
Edit 4:
I have removed all nanoparticle bars and placed half the toroid with the magnet on the side, inside of the top pick up coil - 3 volts!
EDIT 5:
I am going to continue to work with this tonight, and then buy some steel plating tomorrow and redo my previous "parallel Path" experiments, using the steel. I will post tonight if I bump the voltage some more...
-
EDIT 6:
I tried adding more magnets on the other side of the toroid, stronger magnet than what I have, nothing worked...BUT...add one steel bolt..and we are now up to 3.2 volts, and then at a VERY SLOW rotor speed, it stays above 2 volts. The LED is now VERY bright.
EDIT 7:
I have enclosed a real photo below. What I have done now is initiated a form of "magnetic feedback". I took my steel bolt, wrapped it with very fine magnetic wire, I think 32 awg, one layer, and wired it in series with the output of my pick up coils. So.o.o every time the output pulses around the bolt, it turns it into an electromagnet, which pulses and further creates power inside of my pick up coils. I am now up to 3.5 Volts and 2.8 to 3 volts at VERY slow rotor speed!
It is interesting, with the addition of the steel bolt, how violently the toroid vibartes inside of the pick up coils.
-
Hello ALL,
I think I am onto something with this "Magnetic Feedback" that I have initiated. This is the scenario: I placed a fourth pick up coil on top of the three, while placing a new LED across the new coils leads. Spun the rotor, and I am still getting the 3.5 volts on the output LED, but now the LED on the fourth coil lights up dimly. Remember, it is solo, not wired in series. While lit, I slowly lifted the coil, and as I did the LED stayed lit until it reached the top of the electromagnet windings over my bolt and then died, even though there was some bolt, unwound still in the center. I think I will leave this coil out by itself for now, and increase the feedback windings on the bolt. This should strengthen the pulse of the electromagnet and I should see a bump in voltage and brightness of top coil's LED.
If this works, the next logical step would be to increase the length of the bolt and place the rest of my pick up coils on top with that lengthened bolt through the center, and see what I see!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Nice work so far Bruce,
can i ask, what voltage & amperage are you drawing from the input supply..and.what duty cycle approx?
Thanks,
David. D
-
@Mags,
Can you post a schematic of your BEMF recovery circuit?
Thanks.
-
Syncro
here ya go. I just did it in paint. =]
Mags
Edit the + on the cap is on the wrong side, sorry. =] read the next post also.
-
Hey Sychro
Correction. The + mark on the cap is wrong. =]
The cap is charged out of phase with the PS. But adding the pickup coil output works because it is electrically isolated from the rest of the circuit. Sorry bout the error there. Im beat, been up since yesterday playing with this stuff.
Im on to something a lil bit different but kind of the same. As ideas come from all these experiences, and more understanding of what is going on. This Idea is seeded from the experiments that I did this morning on ITS's magnet in the transformer gig that I had to try but put to rest fairly quickly. It was an easy project. But that stiffening of the cores field flexibility by the magnet led me to some good ideas of what can be going on in the cores, and Im mixing that with orbon. We will see in a couple hours.
mags sleepy ideas Maybe Im dreaming =]
-
Hello All,
I have made some progress this evening. ;D
Going with my steel bolt idea, what I did, was purchase several 1"x6" by 1/8" steel plates. At first I tried the Flynn Parallel path and it does not work for this application, at least not with a toroid that does not fully saturate. I have received my NEW toroid in, but have not yet wound it. I will keep working on bumping power output, until I can go no further, and then try a saturating toroid and a switching circuit. This is real current, not just a reading with no power behind it. Even though it is very little, keep in mind what I am doing. Optimizing! If I can eventually barely spin the rotor and can produce 12 volts and some current, imagine what should happen when I switch it very fast with an electronic circuit.
So, what worked tonight was taking last nights set up, of inserting the toroid with a magnet in the center of it. With a small 1" bar magnet on the face of the toroid, with the NORTH up (works way better!) Then I place three of the steel plates sticking straight up, from the top of the magnet. I am now up to 3.9 volts output!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hello again,
What can I say, but WOW! Set up is identical as above, but now, I have added a SECOND LED (7000 mcd from Radio Shack-both) in series with the first, changing the positive and negative sides of the LED from what I did have....New Output Voltage ------> 5.6 Volts Both LED's Brightly lit. I have NO idea why the voltage increased to the load... kinda freaky! hehehe
Tomorrow I purchase some more of these special LED's. But now, I have some more ideas to test and coils to add. By the way, the output Frequency is aprox 138 Hz.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hello ALL,
Can anyone say...WEIRD..lol. I just added a blue LED, this is the third in series, brightly lit, and NEW output voltage.... 8 volts !!!
New output voltage frequency.... 330 Hz.
Now, a few things you should remember:
A. I am working with "Brook's Coils", all wound professionally (three so far)
B. Could the LED's somehow be increasing the frequency within these Brooks pick up coils and as the frequency increases, so does the output voltage?
Time to add some more LED's... I still have three more coils I plan on adding, but first tonight, time for more LED's.
Resistance in Ohms of output coils = 753 Ohms
Output voltage = 8 volts
Cool stuff,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hey Bruce
I have some pretty good experience with LEDs.
Are the leds the same? Color, model?
If you have them in series, your output is no longer being clamped by the single led's running voltage, to say it the easy way. Now you have 2 in series, that clamp voltage is 2 times as much, 2 times the drop or clamp. The led's wont take current till the voltage rises to the running voltage, and if it draws from the output if it goes below the running voltage the draw stops and voltage rises again from there when currents are weak with an unstable voltage. Also if it is bouncing from run to not run, it could be oscillating enough to get the leds go into overdrive, which happens with short pulses, thus more brightness. If you check on a scope you might just see it osc. If not and the output is stable with a cap, they could be just hovering in the on off area and some other factor is giving extra brightness. Its hard to say without seeing what you have going for sure.The JT's are definitely putting the leds into overdrive, so thats why the are soo bright with little current due to the short pulses and high freq. Some laser diodes use pulse circuits also to get them to overdrive.
Hope that makes sense. =]
Mags
-
8 volts across a blue led? It should be about 4 to 5v clamp. So you must be putting out some juice. It just may burn the led without a limit res.
Good to see it coming together. I have messed with orbon for quite a while and it just doesnt seem to stop surprising me with these lil tweeks and increases.
oh, are you using a limit res on the led? That could be why the 8v is not burning it.
Mags
-
Hi Mags,
Two LED's are the same, and one is differant. Tomorrow, I will have all three the same.
The setup is VERY sensitive. ALL magnet orientation must be correct to get the Maximum output. I have attached a simple drawing to help everyone understand, and to keep lab notes.
I tore it apart carefully, so that I can repeat it tomorrow evening. The magnet facings AND placement are critical! If I change on facing, cuts output in half!
I can now, turn the rotor by hand, slow motion, and when the reed switch switches the circuit, my three LED's light. It's pretty cool.
I might make a vid tomorrow night. I'd rather experiment some more, though. I still want to optimize and think some things through.
Realizing the the magnet in the center of my toroid MUST be SOUTH facing the bar magnet (mag in toroid is horizontal, bar mag is vertical) to keep from cutting the output in half, has given me some whole new ideas to boost power with more magnets. I am realizing, if you just "add" magnets and nothing happens, it may be because their position relative to everything is not correct.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hello ALL,
Can anyone say...WEIRD..lol. I just added a blue LED, this is the third in series, brightly lit, and NEW output voltage.... 8 volts !!!
New output voltage frequency.... 330 Hz.
Now, a few things you should remember:
A. I am working with "Brook's Coils", all wound professionally (three so far)
B. Could the LED's somehow be increasing the frequency within these Brooks pick up coils and as the frequency increases, so does the output voltage?
Time to add some more LED's... I still have three more coils I plan on adding, but first tonight, time for more LED's.
Resistance in Ohms of output coils = 753 Ohms
Output voltage = 8 volts
Cool stuff,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
Bruce,
Could you please tell us what is the input voltage and current to your Circuit? At what duty cycle? Is it pulsed DC?
Can you tell us also the consumption current of your load( the leds)?
Thanks for your attention. Keep going on, Good experiment, Bruce.
-
Hello ALL,
Can anyone say...WEIRD..lol. I just added a blue A, this is the third in series, brightly lit, and NEW output voltage.... 8 volts !!!
...
@Bruce
Magluvin nicely answered your question and may I add that LEDs are like Zener diodes but they conduct in the forward direction with these forward voltages depending on their color. Under their forward voltage threshold they do not conduct. So they must have a positive polarity received at their anode wrt their cathode, and this voltage must be a bit higher than the threshold forward voltage, otherwise no light can come out. And in the reverse direction they do not conduct at all, till the reverse voltage reach a so called reverse breakdown voltage, this latter ranging from 7-8V to over 10V or so, LED-type dependent.
If you find the frequency increases as you add more LEDs, then probably the loading effect of the LEDs that they have on your output changes: more LEDs mean decreasing loading current while the output voltage increases. If you try using loading resistors instead of the LEDs, in an increasing value order, like 100 Ohm, 200 Ohm 500 Ohm etc and you also find the frequency changes you may check this. However, using resistors will mean the load is connected in every moment while in case of the LEDs they conduct in every second half wave of the output waveform only-- (here I assume you do not use a full wave bridge in front of the LEDs) --whenever the peak voltage exceeds the forward voltage of the LED(s), and this is a huge difference in the load.
@Magluvin
To answer your blue LED question, Bruce meant he added a third (a blue) LED in series with the previous two, so the total forward voltage drop (8V) was the sum of the three diodes drop, ok? By the way, Bruce has a "built-in" resistor in the coil (and can serve for the LED as a limit resistor if you like) because the DC resistance of his coils is 753 Ohms, huge number of turns made from thin wire.
rgds, Gyula
-
@Bruce
Magluvin nicely answered your question and may I add that LEDs are like Zener diodes but they conduct in the forward direction with these forward voltages depending on their color. Under their forward voltage threshold they do not conduct. So they must have a positive polarity received at their anode wrt their cathode, and this voltage must be a bit higher than the threshold forward voltage, otherwise no light can come out. And in the reverse direction they do not conduct at all, till the reverse voltage reach a so called reverse breakdown voltage, this latter ranging from 7-8V to over 10V or so, LED-type dependent.
If you find the frequency increases as you add more LEDs, then probably the loading effect of the LEDs that they have on your output changes: more LEDs mean decreasing loading current while the output voltage increases. If you try using loading resistors instead of the LEDs, in an increasing value order, like 100 Ohm, 200 Ohm 500 Ohm etc and you also find the frequency changes you may check this. However, using resistors will mean the load is connected in every moment while in case of the LEDs they conduct in every second half wave of the output waveform only-- (here I assume you do not use a full wave bridge in front of the LEDs) --whenever the peak voltage exceeds the forward voltage of the LED(s), and this is a huge difference in the load.
@Magluvin
To answer your blue LED question, Bruce meant he added a third (a blue) LED in series with the previous two, so the total forward voltage drop (8V) was the sum of the three diodes drop, ok? By the way, Bruce has a "built-in" resistor in the coil (and can serve for the LED as a limit resistor if you like) because the DC resistance of his coils is 753 Ohms, huge number of turns made from thin wire.
rgds, Gyula
Outstanding explanation Gyula. Thank you! And thank you also Mags.
@Aaron
I will do this later on. This morning I broke my unit back down to 1 coil. I have some weird TPU'ish (new word!) ideas I want to play with this afternoon with the setup and see what I see..
@All
It would seem that the magnet within the center of the toroid accounts for much of the output voltage. So, what do we do with that knowledge? I want to wind my brooks as a toroid and then wrap a wrapping around that, with an additional magnet and see what I see.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Evening ALL,
Tonight, I have changed my LED's for 10mm White LED, with an intensity of 28,500 mcd. Forward current is 20mA and Forward supply is 3.5 volts.
I am at 2.5 volts output, using one coil, lighting up (not completely) my new LED. I have a lot of new ideas to try and will be easier with one coil. If any of them work, I can do it to the additional two pickups.
I will let you know as always,
Bruce
http://EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Edit 1:
All of my Brooks coils have a seperate bias winding on them. I have not wired or tested them... until now. New Voltage One Coil: 2.9 volts
-
Evening All,
Well, I have learned much tonight. I did not even get to the experiments with wrapping the brooks, because of so many other things I was trying.
For best results, I think I will need to wind my new toroid that will fully saturate and test with those. It is extremely sensitive. put a magnet the wrong way, cut your output by half, etc.
@Mags,
I think the best bet to make this work into OU, is to wire SEVERAL toroids, that saturate, in series with one another. Have each one "power" a pickup coil, and make these into a toroid itself...HEY, that looks like JLN Labs graphic then...LOL Wire some more Mags and put them in series. Play with the magnetic pole orientations, and make sure your toroid is saturating. Best advice I can give.
Pictured below is my one coil SSG1. Hand turned even at super slow speeds.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hello ALL,
I was able to light up brightly 5 LED's, by adding a 4th coil on top, that I finally figured out how to get it producing, it had two, and a 5th coil by it'self with another small toroid. I made a lot of changes in the last hour and discovered something new that appears to allow me to add magnets (finally!) and increase the power output, while dropping the amps into the toroid(s). By adding two more in series and steel and magnets in the coil, I dropped the amps going to the toroids by 1/3".
The steel and magnets have me very curious. I wonder if thinner steel like sheet metal would work better? magnet placement and toroid placement is critical. Even the steel, leaning the wrong way, dim LED's, correct it and they are bright again.
Now I think through all of this and formulate a new plan for tomorrow's experiments.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hey bruce
I see in the picture above, it looks like you are lighting the led that is still in the plastic package bag. =]
Also I hear you talking about a rotor but I never see it, nor what it is for with this idea.
As for the toroids in series, I think that maybe it would cause a loose link in the magnetic loop chain. Too many wire winding gaps between them.
Try this, use a diode to capture the bemf from the Tcoil and compare that to your output from the pickup coils. It should be much greater. Being that the bemf of the Tcoil is just being wasted, add it to your output and you will be stepping up to lighting 12v light bulbs instead. Without the bemf, yes you are just looking to find a way to increase that end of the output. But on each try, just add the bemf also at some point to see what is there combined. It is not cheating, it is making efficient use of the input power as a whole.
mags
-
Hey bruce
I see in the picture above, it looks like you are lighting the led that is still in the plastic package bag. =]
Also I hear you talking about a rotor but I never see it, nor what it is for with this idea.
As for the toroids in series, I think that maybe it would cause a loose link in the magnetic loop chain. Too many wire winding gaps between them.
Try this, use a diode to capture the bemf from the Tcoil and compare that to your output from the pickup coils. It should be much greater. Being that the bemf of the Tcoil is just being wasted, add it to your output and you will be stepping up to lighting 12v light bulbs instead. Without the bemf, yes you are just looking to find a way to increase that end of the output. But on each try, just add the bemf also at some point to see what is there combined. It is not cheating, it is making efficient use of the input power as a whole.
mags
Hi Mags,
My circuit given to me by Alex, has BEMF capture. You see, the way I think is, I know that is available. Like I know that adding more coils is available. Now I know adding toroids is available. I know how to place the magnets and steel to make more power available. I am looking for things that I don't know is available to boost power, and then will put it all together. ;)
Picture below is my set up. Rotor is on left, I spun it before taking the pic. I only have two LEDS hooked up for the pic, I am tearing down, getting ready for tonights experiments.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Good Evening ALL,
I feel I have been very successful this evening! Steel, Magnet, Steel, Magnet, Steel, Magnet, Steel.
I have two toroids wired in series, and a magnetic steel configuration above it. ALL magnets are NORTH pole facing up. Cuts your output by 3/4 otherwise. contraption is on the TOP of the toroid. The toroid is Vertical, hole facing out, with a magnet inside. So much more to try with the magnets, they make such a huge difference when used in conjunction with steel, magnet, steel, magnet.
I still want to try some toroidal windings over the pickup coils, and also try a few more things. I was going to wrap my new toroid, but I keep making progress and have to force myself to stop, take notes and sleep... LOL I need more magnets.. ;D
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hey Bruce
Great minds think alike. I tried to wrap a few coils (no ferrite core)with toroid windings yesterday. I did it thinking that it would distort the fields of the magnets within the pickup coil itself. It has very little effect. Strange isnt it?
I thought with great confidence that it would do something good. I thought that the oil inside the toroidal winding would see a greater distortion than with the ferrite. Give it a try if you like. I tried many combination's of magnet influence on them. Very disappointing.
Back to the drawing board, in my mind. =]
mags
-
Hey Bruce
Great minds think alike. I tried to wrap a few coils (no ferrite core)with toroid windings yesterday. I did it thinking that it would distort the fields of the magnets within the pickup coil itself. It has very little effect. Strange isnt it?
I thought with great confidence that it would do something good. I thought that the oil inside the toroidal winding would see a greater distortion than with the ferrite. Give it a try if you like. I tried many combination's of magnet influence on them. Very disappointing.
Back to the drawing board, in my mind. =]
mags
Hey Mags,
I am still going to try...but, I have now reduced my input power from 2 amps using one toroid, to having 4 toroids in series and a 100 ohm resistor on the battery lead. Amps are reduced to .070... ;)
The idea, I am thinking, will be to wire in series as many toroids as possible, all the same cores, and windings. Wrap with just enough windings to oscillate the magnet. The MORE toroids in series, the LESS power used...why? Because the toroid DOES NOT SEE THE LOAD, because the power is being generated by oscillating a magnetic field. Yes, more amps make it to oscillate better, but having the proper core, with powerful magnet inside, should more than make up for it. I will add up my output power tomorow and see where I stand. But, hehehe, I simply need to keep adding toroids and remove the 100 Ohm resistor.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hey Bruce
Good luck with the coil /toroid windings. =]
I have a question that maybe you can answer or someone here.
Are certain cores made more for suppressing induction vs working like a transformer core?
I have some cores that just plain suck at working period, and some that work awesome.
thanks
Mags
-
Are certain cores made more for suppressing induction vs working like a transformer core?
Well, sorta, almost. Check that email I have for you and you'll have more info than you ever wanted.
(tried to PM you here, but PM doesn't seem to be working properly for me)
0c
-
Hello ALL,
Well, I have optimized as much as I think that I can. I came up with a whole new design, magnets and coils only. Steel was not needed, once I understood the proper placement of magnets. I also came up with another great idea, of using larger toroids and placing coils beneath and above.
I also added an additional 4 magnets to the rotor, so that the switching speed was doubled. This was an encouraging experiment, as the current and voltage on the output increased.
I used my laser tach and I spin the rotor by hand an avg of 380 RPM's at start up. This comes to 6.3 rotations of the rotor per second. I then multiply this number by 8 (number of magnets I have on the rotor) and I see that I am switching at 50.4 Hz.
So, at 50.4 Hz, my three completed units together have an output of 24 volts at 240 microamps.
My input is .180 ma at 12 volts. Now, most of that voltage is not needed, so I think that the input can stil be trimmed considerably. Now, the question becomes, "What maximum switching speed will it allow?"
I calculate that 2 KHz or above, if it will allow, would get me more output than input...the holy grail. Now, If I had some more brooks coils, we could lower that number.
BUT>>>Another way to lower that "Threshold" is to also add coils to the "edges" of the toroid. There is enough room there for some.... ;)
Ingredients:
On the bottom is a brooks coil, hole facing up.
next, I added 2 N32 mags into the hole.
Next I placed a Large 2" magnet, laying down next to the brooks coil, it's side against the side of the brooks coil, so that the magnet in the hole are attracted to the magnets on the outside edge of coil.
Next, large toroid is added, vertical. NO magnet in large toroid.
Next, brooks coil is added on top. NO CHANGE in input power, because power is being generated by oscillating the flux.
2 N32 mags are added into the hole.
Next Large 1" magnet is placed on the outside of brooks coil, on the outer edge, so that the inner magnets are in attraction.
That is it so far!! See pics below...
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hello ALL,
Well, just when I think optimization is over, I have a new idea..
I think it is time to tune the Brooks output coils. I set one up as an LC tank circuit, but not yet a resonant tank. I put a 561 1Kv cap in parallel with the output coil. With no load. Voltage rose quickly to 24 volts in just this one coil alone. Now, how can I use that? If I put a load (LED) across, it drops back to 5 volts output. I have a kooky idea, perhaps, but want to hear from you all, first.
I am also going to work on finding the resonant frequency of the coil and matching a cap for a resonant tuned tank. But even then, how do I get at it?
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce
Well, if you get it to resonate, then you should be able to get another tank of the same to resonate by 1 wire between them. But then your still at a point as to how to get it out for use.
try a cap in series with the led. Like a 10 to 20 mfd NP cap. When I capture bemf of like 200v, I get less out by diode alone. But when I add a cap to 1 leg, in series with the diode, I get more, kinda tesla style. =]
Mags
Edit Actually maybe not in your case. This will work though...
1 cap on each leg of the coil and the other ends of the caps to a bridge, after the bridge put the led, even add a cap to stabilize the out from the bridge. For some reason the caps ease the output as compared to direct rectifiers.
Hope that makes sense. If you would like me to do a vid, just say the werd. werd =]
-
@Bruce-TPU
Just a reminder that the natural oscillating frequency of magnetism is estimated to be around 159 Hz. JLN is pulsing his toroid at 200 Hz with a duty cycle of .75. 53 Hz would give you a one third harmonic, not a bad choice of range for pulse frequency. Your progress so far has been leap frogging at a dizzying pace. Your attempts to harness resonance very promising. Breakthrough looks imminent.
-
@Bruce-TPU
Just a reminder that the natural oscillating frequency of magnetism is estimated to be around 159 Hz. JLN is pulsing his toroid at 200 Hz with a duty cycle of .75. 53 Hz would give you a one third harmonic, not a bad choice of range for pulse frequency. Your progress so far has been leap frogging at a dizzying pace. Your attempts to harness resonance very promising. Breakthrough looks imminent.
Hi Synchro,
You are correct about JLN Labs. They are using a freq gen to pulse at 200 Hz. BUT...and this is the big but, I am simply switching on/off the toroid, so can it be switched in the KHz range and still work? If yes, I will be able to produce as much power as I want. If no, then the question becomes, what is the MAX switch rate it will work at? If I find that, then I can work backwards from there.
Today I have some weird experiments planned, using the pickup coils. I will let you know if any work.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
@Bruce,
Increasing the pulse frequency into the best harmonic KHz range can be determined by testing with a potentiometer, but I believe the harmonic is a function of threes and nines, not a decimal progression.
-
Good Evening ALL,
The day started off slowly, but then a couple of very cool things were discovered!
First let me say, that when we combine this very cool pulsing of the toroid, with my Brooks coils, things begin to get mysterious. Turn the bottom outside magnet to a different pole and output drops by half (marked "up" on mag just in case...LOL)
Place a Brooks coil on top of another with the magnetic fields going the wrong direction, and output drops to 1/5....
Then we get to the cool stuff... :o
Stack the brooks one on top of another and they are a gift that keeps giving. No matter how many I stack on top, they produce about the same amount of power.
And then, I wired ALL the brooks biases in series, about 6 ohms worth, in series with my toroids, resistance dropped the power input and the output rose by about 20% per Coil. If I had more Brooks coils (I only have 6) I feel I could stack them to the ceiling.
Now, what you see pictured below, is ONE MODULE, I calculated that I could have 4 modules, as I alrady have all 4 toroids in series, as this cuts power consumption.
Is it the B field of the brooks, generating power in the ones above it? Oh, by the way, tried to stack some UNDER the bottom toroid, and no way. Very little output. Could be because of how I have the bottom magnet biasing things. But, any who... Each Brooks coil is $30.00 USD. So, before I purchase some more, what I will do, is take the CENTER Brooks on the top stack, and turn it into a Resonant Tank Circuit. I think this might induce more power into the coils above and beneath. If you ould feel how powerful the magnetic field is arond the Brooks coil Edges. I held another coils vertical to the Brooks and it picked up power.
So, next step is to build and test Resonant LC in the middle, and to Build my electronic switch. If, with the electronic switch, I can produce enough power output to have a chance to break unity if I had more Brooks coils, I will begin to buy some, borrow some, what ever is needed.
Right now I am pulsing at 50.3 Hz. Output frequency of aprox 180 Hz and a duty cycle of 82%. Voltage for module one SSG3 Output is 20 volts AC and aprox 250 uA Four modules would give me 80 volts at 1ma output, hand turning a rotor for switching. 12.5 Khz might get me to OU, if the switch works to that frequency. On/Off is all I need for now. ...
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
thats the biggest joule thief i have ever seen! Just playin. =]
but the stacking of the coils being never ending is interesting. Like the coils become 1 and the field is treated like 1 big pickup coil and the fields have to travel the full path to complete the field as one big singularity.
What are the ohms of these coils? have you tried paralleling them?
Mags
-
They are 253 ohms each. Brooks coils have some very special qualities not found in other coil types. ;) Joule thief today, SSG3 tomorrow...
Tomorrow I think I will wire all of them together in series, the outputs, remove the LED's and replace them all with one 12volt DC bulb, or two.
Then I want to work on the tuned resonant LC tank... and capturing that bemf.
I am really curious what a real electronic circuit will produce. Once that is in place, the last thing to play with will be the power going through the bias. But that will be the last thing.
Of course, I do have a hankering for trying some standing waves inside one of these coils, just for kicks...lol no pun intended.
Any other ideas are always appreciated.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Try this if you will. Its easy and conclusive to my thoughts on those coils from what you just wrote.
make yourself a coil of 18 to 20ga of like 50 turns, and 2 in. in dia. Then try what you are doing with that. Treat it like an S2gen just for kicks. Your current will increase by an order of magnitude. The coils you have are too high in ohms for current. you can put 25v across one of those coils and the current measured there is about the best you will ever get out around that voltage. very nice coils, but better to have low ohms on a gen coil to drive things. If your input is 5v, you should get around 40 to 50v no load. If your coils were putting out 250v, then as you load it down, the current would be increased. and as it goes below 25v due to load change, the current would be more as the load decreases in ohms.
try it and you will be close to powering bulbs with just gen power without bemf added.
My goal is to get my output to around 18v with the little interior bulb and i will be at or near unity. Im at 14.7v at about 250ma at this time. i get about a 1/2 volt increase with playing just about every couple days, when i do work on it.
you will be happy you tried it. =]
mags
-
Reading these posts, I wonder why no one has this thing working OU yet.
If the toroidal coil is actually unaffected by the secondary load (output coil) then this should be easy.
Simply wind the toroid and place the magnet in the center and connect it to the meter to get the inductance. Then using the inductance, select a good capacitor value to get a resonate frequency in a reasonable range, and connect the capacitor either serial or parallel to the winding.
Apply a frequency generator and scope and tune for optimal resonance.
Place the resonating toroidal coil into the secondary and measure the inductance of the secondary coil and set it up to resonate at twice the toroidal frequency using the same method as the toroidal setup.
The entire unit is now tuned to the best possible output and if not OU then this setup probably cannot work as an OU device.
-
@Bruce,
The domain flip must trigger a scalar wave that is like a Tsunami in the Magnetic background tissue that the world around us is immersed in, output coils could theoretically be stacked to infinity!
-
Reading these posts, I wonder why no one has this thing working OU yet.
If the toroidal coil is actually unaffected by the secondary load (output coil) then this should be easy.
Simply wind the toroid and place the magnet in the center and connect it to the meter to get the inductance. Then using the inductance, select a good capacitor value to get a resonate frequency in a reasonable range, and connect the capacitor either serial or parallel to the winding.
Apply a frequency generator and scope and tune for optimal resonance.
Place the resonating toroidal coil into the secondary and measure the inductance of the secondary coil and set it up to resonate at twice the toroidal frequency using the same method as the toroidal setup.
The entire unit is now tuned to the best possible output and if not OU then this setup probably cannot work as an OU device.
Good post Lumen! Setting it up to resonate at twice the toroidal frequency is called parametric resonance, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametric_oscillator
This effect is different from regular resonance because it exhibits the instability phenomenon. Parametric excitation differs from forcing since the action appears as a time varying modification on a system parameter. If capacitance changes twice per one period of oscillation then the resonance can also be brought into parametric oscillation.
If a capacitor is charged until its voltage equals the sampled voltage of an incoming weak signal, and if the capacitor's capacitance is then reduced (say, by manually moving the plates further apart), then the voltage across the capacitor will increase. In this way, the voltage of the weak signal is amplified.
If the capacitor is a varicap diode, then the 'moving the plates' can be done simply by applying time-varying DC voltage to the varicap diode, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varicap_diode
GB
-
Reading these posts, I wonder why no one has this thing working OU yet.
If the toroidal coil is actually unaffected by the secondary load (output coil) then this should be easy.
Simply wind the toroid and place the magnet in the center and connect it to the meter to get the inductance. Then using the inductance, select a good capacitor value to get a resonate frequency in a reasonable range, and connect the capacitor either serial or parallel to the winding.
Apply a frequency generator and scope and tune for optimal resonance.
Place the resonating toroidal coil into the secondary and measure the inductance of the secondary coil and set it up to resonate at twice the toroidal frequency using the same method as the toroidal setup.
The entire unit is now tuned to the best possible output and if not OU then this setup probably cannot work as an OU device.
This is not how the toroid is affecting the pickup coils. Please re read the thread.
The toroid is simply oscillating the magnetic flux from the magnets, not acting as a transformer. The toroid need very little voltage, and a little current to do this. On/Off On/Off
Cheers,
Bruce
-
This is not how the toroid is affecting the pickup coils. Please re read the thread.
The toroid is simply oscillating the magnetic flux from the magnets, not acting as a transformer. The toroid need very little voltage, and a little current to do this. On/Off On/Off
Cheers,
Bruce
If the capacitance doesn't change twice per one period of oscillation then it won't be brought into parametric oscillation or parametric resonance and you won't achieve OU. This will work in this setup because the magnetic interactions are decoupled from each other, but are coupled together parametrically and no BEMF will result.
This has nothing to do with transformers. Lumen is right on the money with his post.
GB
-
This is not how the toroid is affecting the pickup coils. Please re read the thread.
The toroid is simply oscillating the magnetic flux from the magnets, not acting as a transformer. The toroid need very little voltage, and a little current to do this. On/Off On/Off
Cheers,
Bruce
Bruce,
Please re-read your basic electronics handbook. Using a resonate circuit in the toroidal coil will require very little input since you only need to re-enforce the collapsing field.
This also eliminates any need to recover the BEMF, since it is already recovered in the resonate state.
AND because it is not working like a transformer, there should not be any coupling of load between the the two coils.
The secondary should resonate at twice the input because there is no coupling between the two coils and each half of the input wave will cause the same effect in the toroidal coil, so this will be occurring at twice the rate of the input.(once on the high side and again on the low side)
SO the pickup will see a magnetic flux at twice the input frequency of the toroidal coil, and if this is also a resonate circuit, it will have the highest gain at only one frequency.
So that is why it would already be the best it could get. I mean, why mess around with all the unknown values hoping to magically come across something that works?
-
@ Lumens and Groundloop, and ALL
What I was referring to, was earlier in the thread when Alex attempted the very thing lumens suggests. It is not as easy as you may think. If I recall, Alex stated that the Resonant frequency continued to change, as it interacted with the pickup coil, etc.
I do not know that he did it exactly like you suggested, he could answer that, but it sounded very similar.
I was at work when I hurridly read your post. Sorry I misunderstood what you were wanting to say. Now I think I do indeed understand. ;)
I do like the idea but am not yet at that point of tuning.
I worked twelve hours today, came home and was simply going to wire my Brooks coils in series. Sounds simple, eh? LOL Not so. They don't like series...at all! So, began to wire them in parallel for now. Will eventually tune each one to a resonant frequency, but that will come later. I am a very methodical and thorough experimenter, because I want to understand every detail of what I find out as I go.
So, what happened when I wired them in parallel? I have explained in a picture below. I would earnestly love you to help explain the results to me. Or somene here... ;) :o
-
Hello ALL,
These next numbers are even more strange! LOL
Top coil of the middle stack of 4: By itself:
.775 V
70.8 R
0.01095 I
0.00849 P
NOW< Watch what happens when it is added in Parallel with the two directly below it.
2.105 V
45.5 R
0.04626 I
.09737 P
67.22% increase in wattage (power) because of this one coil!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
great work so far :)
could you state what your input voltage and current draw is alongside your outputs so as to enable a comparison to be made? also frequency/s and duty cycles.
oh, just remembered, what exactly is the difference between a Brooks coil....and a standard-dandard coil? ( id never heard of a Brooks coil till you mentioned it )
keep up the great experiments
-
Bruce,
great work so far :)
could you state what your input voltage and current draw is alongside your outputs so as to enable a comparison to be made? also frequency/s and duty cycles.
oh, just remembered, what exactly is the difference between a Brooks coil....and a standard-dandard coil? ( id never heard of a Brooks coil till you mentioned it )
keep up the great experiments
Hi Rave,
A Brooks Coil: ;D Fun link! Google brooks coil if you want more, but it says it all IMHO!!! http://crackedforge.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/superconducting-magnetic-energy-storage-rocket/
With an added turbo boost of a dc bias to strengthen the B field. "Shields are up Captain!" Bias acts like a force field, holding everthing inside, in very simple terms.
Off to bed, more fun tomorrow....
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce,
Yes, you are correct. I did use a 555 oscillator circuit that did control a mosfet.
The circuit had variable resistors for frequency, duty cycle and mosfet gate resistor control.
I did try out all the frequencies the circuit could handle. At no point was the output
greater than the consumed input power. I did find that the output was high
voltage "radio wave like" and did disturb my digital volt meter a lot. I also found that
the circuit did alter the tuning when I brought my hand closer to the coils.
@rave154
A Brooks Coil is generally known as a special case of the circular coil inductor of rectangular cross section that is implemented to achieve the maximum inductance with a given length of wire.
http://www.nessengr.com/techdata/brooks/brooks.html
Alex.
-
Bruce,
Yes, you are correct. I did use a 555 oscillator circuit that did control a mosfet.
The circuit had variable resistors for frequency, duty cycle and mosfet gate resistor control.
I did try out all the frequencies the circuit could handle. At no point was the output
greater than the consumed input power. I did find that the output was high
voltage "radio wave like" and did disturb my digital volt meter a lot. I also found that
the circuit did alter the tuning when I brought my hand closer to the coils.
Alex.
How was your circuit changing the capacitance twice per period of oscillations in order to achieve parametric resonance? How was your pickup coil resonating at twice the frequency as the toroidal coil in your circuit?
Did you try a varicap diode? Parametric resonance is different from regular resonance. Your circuit did not change the capacitance twice per oscillation. The parameters must vary at roughly twice the natural frequency of the oscillator. Your previous circuit does not achieve parametric resonance. I hope you will modify your circuit in order to achieve parametric resonance, because I would fail miserably in trying to design a circuit.
Thanks,
GB
-
@gravityblock,
My circuit did use normal resonance. The toroid coils was in series connected to
a 555 oscillator and a mosfet transistor. My goal was to see if I could switch the
magnetic field on and off to see if I got any output in the center coil.
Alex.
-
Hi Lumen,
hi Gravityblock,
let us assume we have an input frequency = f (toroid) = 100 Hz. So, we have to have an output frequency = f (pickup coil) = 100 Hz. (The operation frequency be 100 Hz).
Can we agree on the above??
What do you suggest to be the resonant(!) frequency of the input circuit (I would prefer a parallel tank curcuit for input circuit)? Is it 50 Hz? Is it 100 Hz? Is it 200 Hz?
What do you suggest to be the resonant(!) frequency of the output curcuit? Is it 50 Hz? Is it 100Hz? Is it 200 Hz?
Thanks for answers
magneto_DC
-
Hello ALL,
These next numbers are even more strange! LOL
Top coil of the middle stack of 4: By itself:
.775 V
70.8 R
0.01095 I
0.00849 P
NOW< Watch what happens when it is added in Parallel with the two directly below it.
2.105 V
45.5 R
0.04626 I
.09737 P
67.22% increase in wattage (power) because of this one coil!
Cheers,
Bruce
Morning ALL,
Next coil, this is the coil at the bottom of the 4 coils in the middle of the stack. ;D :o
Measured By itself:
1.30 V
70.8 R
0.01836 I
0.02387 P
Measured in Parallel with the last three, and their parallel reading is quoted above:
2.65 V
38.4 R
0.06901 I
0.18288 P OLD Power (wattage) total of three coils: .09737
AGAIN a 53% GAIN in wattage!
Will this continue? the next coil is at the bottom under the toroid. Will it affect the ones above? When I get home from work, we will find out.... ;)
Wait till I switch this sucker with some electronics, add some resonance tuning, etc.... I am VERY encouraged.
P.S. This is just ONE module. I have 4 toroids in series, so could build many more modules...without affecting power input.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
;D ;D ;D ;D
COP=8.1
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#COP
Ferrites_and_Ferromagnetics_Free_Energy_Generation
-
Hi Lumen,
hi Gravityblock,
let us assume we have an input frequency = f (toroid) = 100 Hz. So, we have to have an output frequency = f (pickup coil) = 100 Hz. (The operation frequency be 100 Hz).
Can we agree on the above??
What do you suggest to be the resonant(!) frequency of the input circuit (I would prefer a parallel tank circuit for input circuit)? Is it 50 Hz? Is it 100 Hz? Is it 200 Hz?
What do you suggest to be the resonant(!) frequency of the output circuit? Is it 50 Hz? Is it 100Hz? Is it 200 Hz?
Thanks for answers
magneto_DC
magneto,
Because you know what a parallel tank circuit is, I will assume you have built them before in some radio circuit or filter before and understand that normally the best output frequency would be the same as the input frequency.
This is because the coupling of the windings would operate in phase in a normal transformer condition so the output frequency would also be in phase with the input.
The concept involved here is operating with NO coupling between the coils (providing the toroid coils were wound correctly) and is based on core saturation or near saturation.
Core saturation in the toroidal coil will occur because of the input current and is not based on the direction of the input current. This causes the state change twice per cycle on the input.
The flux that it outputs however, is always the same direction. To be in phase with this flux, the output must complete it's cycle at these peaks, and that is twice the input frequency.
So for 100Hz input, the output would be 200Hz to be in phase.
-
;D ;D ;D ;D
COP=8.1
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#COP
Ferrites_and_Ferromagnetics_Free_Energy_Generation
Wings, I may be wrong here, But that -14v is measured through 1000ohm resistors I believe
Truly I cannot see where the claim holds water. Now if that 14v was across a 5ohm resistor and was continuous, well then we are seeing some cop. Even if it were 14v/500ohm ( 2 1000ohm res in parallel) the output would be .392w output.
Other than that, is he saying that the input is .049w ?
Im not seeing how he is coming up with cop 8 April 1st is a long time away. =]
Mags
-
Oh thanks, I see now.
You dont refer to any parmetric resonance in general, but especially how to replace a (lets say now) 200 Hz DC pulsing into a 100 Hz resonant tank circuit.
Every halfwave of current (+ or -) into the toroid do saturation! It results in 200 cycles per second. The parallel tank curcuit resonant frequency is f(r) = 100 Hz.
(I would prefer parallel tank curcuit, because the (inside) current between capacitor and toroid at resonance grows hugh, whereas the current INTO the circuit declines).
None the less, the output frequency is f(out) = 200Hz.
Best regards
magneto_DC
-
Wings, I may be wrong here, But that -14v is measured through 1000ohm resistors I believe
Truly I cannot see where the claim holds water. Now if that 14v was across a 5ohm resistor and was continuous, well then we are seeing some cop. Even if it were 14v/500ohm ( 2 1000ohm res in parallel) the output would be .392w output.
Other than that, is he saying that the input is .049w ?
Im not seeing how he is coming up with cop 8 April 1st is a long time away. =]
Mags, he is only looking at the OUTPUT coil:
When the input (8V) to the toroid is ON, the OUTPUT coil creates a voltage of 5.0469V across a 10K resistor.
When the input to the toroid is switched OFF, the OUTPUT coil creates a voltage of -14.377V across another 10K resistor (the resistors are "separated" in different circuits by two fast switching diodes).
JLN says the COP is the quotient of the squares of these two voltages, so (-14.377)^2/5.0469^2 = ~8.1.
I'm not sure about his math or what this comparison really means, but I believe this is what he is attempting to show with this setup.
M.
-
JLN says the COP is the quotient of the squares of these two voltages, so (-14.377)^2/5.0469^2 = ~8.1.
I'm not sure about his math or what this comparison really means, but I believe this is what he is attempting to show with this setup.
M.
You are right, he has actually changed the definition of COP. Not only him, many people change the definitions of standard terms, trying to explain stuff, and ending up confusing everyone.
This fresh update by JLN uses some other way to get COP (frankly, I have no idea how he got that)
http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/indexen.htm#OVERUNITY
Here, one replicator of SSGen, uses another formula and calls it efficiency instead.
http://freeorbo.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/2sgen-measured-at-714-efficient/
Steorn have re-defined OU (excludes the losses totally), but they got COP correct.
Clearly, most people don't know what COP is. It must be restricted to heat and heat only, nothing else.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance
-
Naudin has withdrawn his part 7 on COP of 8.1
-
Omega O
quote:
Clearly, most people don't know what COP is. It must be restricted to heat and heat only, nothing else.
---------------
Quite true ,however to state the profoundly obvious.
You could go "loopty luuu..........[hopefully where this is heading]
Just so everybody is happy! =:]
Chet
-
Pleasant Evening ALL,
Well, I have added my 5th Brooks output coil, located at the very bottom of the bottom toroid, in parallel with the other four....
First I tested it alone at:
1.045 V
70.3 R
0.01486 I
0.01552 P
Next I wired it in parallel, (you must test the leads, because if I put the leads on the wrong side and it cuts your power in half!) And the following is what happened:
3.15 V
33.1 R
0.09517 I
0.2998 P
This one coil BOOSTED TOTAL POWER (wattage) output by 61%
One more Mr. Brooks to wire up and then time to really have some fun!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Hello ALL,
6th Brooks coil is now in place, and below are the stats!
Top and final Brooks coil by itself:
.719 V
71.3 R
0.01008 I
0.00724 P
Now, what happens when we connect this WEAK coil in parallel with the rest? Hmm...
3.25 V
29.5 R
0.11017 I
0.35805 P
20% OVERALL INCREASE IN POWER! Very Cool!
-
Naudin has withdrawn his part 7 on COP of 8.1
news:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#ratio
l = ((Vdem^2)*10000) / ((Vmag^2)*10000) = 13.8?
-
news:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#ratio
l = ((Vdem^2)*10000) / ((Vmag^2)*10000) = 13.8?
If you round it up, then it is 13.8. After reading the reference materials provided by Naudin on the magnetization-demagnetization of the core and the way this experiment is performed, I will have to agree the 13.8 is a good indicator of COP. Next step is to close the loop. ;D
GB
-
If you round it up, then it is 13.8. After reading the reference materials provided by Naudin on the magnetization-demagnetization of the core and the way this experiment is performed, I will have to agree the 13.8 is a good indicator of COP. Next step is to close the loop. ;D
GB
same man, Nikolay E. Zaev
THE DIRECT CONVERSION OF THE ENVIRONMENT TEMPERATURE INTO ELECTRICITY
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/nzaevncp.htm
-
same man, Nikolay E. Zaev
THE DIRECT CONVERSION OF THE ENVIRONMENT TEMPERATURE INTO ELECTRICITY
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/nzaevncp.htm
Some schematics in the above link show relay
contacts in the main power loop for switching...Please
don't do that.
:S:MarkSCoffman
-
Actually I don't agree at all either with you and JLN also. Here is why:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8411.msg230946#msg230946
Do you guys agree with my statements ?
Did you read, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8597.0;attach=42563 and http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/inductive_conversion.pdf
He is measuring input versus output. In Episode 7, the magnetization process represents the input power and the demagnetization process is the output power. He has already showed in previous experiments that the pickup coil being loaded doesn't drop the voltage or the current of the input power, so Naudin's last experiment is the same as measuring the input power verses the output power indirectly. You will find this experiment is really brilliant, if you study it.
GB
-
@Airstriker and all:
In ferromagnetic materials, the magnetization doesn't stop immediately after the pulse has ended. Induction lags in ferromagnetic materials with quick changes in tension of the field. This phenomenon is attributed to magnetic viscosity. Using this lag allows the magnetic interactions to be decoupled from each other. The excess energy is due to the heat generated during the demagnetization process.
Spontaneous magnetization in the area H=(1.2 + 1.4)Hc is a basis for COP>1 when demagnetization is due to heat. The excess energy is not coming from the magnets, but is coming from the ferromagnetic materials.
GB
-
In Episode 7, the magnetization process represents the input power and the demagnetization process is the output power.
I am okay with this method for measuring the demagnetization process. But I am unsure if this method of measuring accurately reflects the input power during the magnetization process. Is there anyway to verify this represented input power is correct using the other info from the experiment? He says the input voltage is 4V. I believe the Fluke scope shots show a duty cycle. Toroidal coil RDC and Inductance are given. What is the input power to the toroid from these values and does it agree with the power in the output coil for the magnetization process?
Thanks in advance for any assistance.
M.
-
That's the exact question to ask.
my be I am so stupid but:
both the magnetization (9.2 V on 10kohm) and demagnetization (35.3 V on 10Kohm) circuit gives the output power that is costant because DC.
the input power is 85% (because of duty cycle) with 4 V on the same resistance 10kohm.
I am not able to calculate the opto power!
But the output/input power ratio is close to 98?
-
the input power is 85% (because of duty cycle) with 4 V on the same resistance 10kohm.
The 10kohm value is the resistance of the output coil. The input voltage (4V) is to the toroid, not the output coil.
-
Looks like JLN's 2SGen has positioned the Steorn Orbo in the museum of power technology right off the test bench. Steorn's admission that ¨hard drive tolerances¨ are necessary to achieve it's meager 3.8 percent COP can't begin to compare to the simplicity of JLN's MEG design and power ratio of over 13. Zaev reports a solid state ratio of over 16 with the 81 NM material. Zaev's domain shift and weight loss ratios in the magnetic core are fascinating! Makes the Orbo look like a steam engine.
-
The 10kohm value is the resistance of the output coil. The input voltage (4V) is to the toroid, not the output coil.
In this circuit I see 10 kohm in series with the toroid coil!
10kohm everywere
I don't take into account the toroid resistance negligible in comparison to 10kohm, the output coil resistance free
-
In this circuit I see 10 kohm in series with the toroid coil!
Thanks. I didn't pay attention to the resistors in the input circuit. Guess that is why I asked if someone could help!
So, if this is the correct way to calculate, you have an input power of 0.0014 watts to the toroid during the magnetization portion of each cycle. Yet the output coil is showing 0.009 watts during this same portion? And then that is released as 0.1245 watts in the output coil during the demagnetization portion of the cycle, right?
I understand that there is a theory about the gain between magnetization and demagnetization in the output coil. But any explanation for the difference between 0.0014 input from the supply circuit and the 0.009 watts reading on the output coil during magnetization? Shouldn't those two be the same, minus heat losses?
-
Thanks. I didn't pay attention to the resistors in the input circuit. Guess that is why I asked if someone could help!
So, if this is the correct way to calculate, you have an input power of 0.0014 watts to the toroid during the magnetization portion of each cycle. Yet the output coil is showing 0.009 watts during this same portion? And then that is released as 0.1245 watts in the output coil during the demagnetization portion of the cycle, right?
I understand that there is a theory about the gain between magnetization and demagnetization in the output coil. But any explanation for the difference between 0.0014 input from the supply circuit and the 0.009 watts reading on the output coil during magnetization? Shouldn't those two be the same, minus heat losses?
maybe I'm blind but I see
input 0.0014W
output 0.1336 W
you have to remove both the magnetization and demagnetization resistance and recover the energy ...... with two Joule Thief or two inverter on the two capacitors or close the loop directly or....?
-
That 10k in input is probably a copy-paste mistake. It won't even work with 10k there. See this earlier diagram, which shows a correct value of 1 ohm.
So the real input must be: (4*4*0.85)/(1+1.1) = 6W
-
One way to test for over unity is by making an oscillator on the input toroid.
By doing that the circuit will find the resonant frequency by it self. The output
coil must be made to match the load impedance. So some experimentation is needed.
This drawing is showing a standard JT circuit but this can be changed by using other
components e.g. power transistor and different windings on the toroid etc.
If the input battery (one AA rechargeable NiMeH) charge then there is free energy,
if not, well, back to the drawing board.
Just an idea.........
Groundloop.
-
One way to test for over unity is by making an oscillator on the input toroid.
By doing that the circuit will find the resonant frequency by it self. The output
coil must be made to match the load impedance. So some experimentation is needed.
This drawing is showing a standard JT circuit but this can be changed by using other
components e.g. power transistor and different windings on the toroid etc.
If the input battery (one AA rechargeable NiMeH) charge then there is free energy,
if not, well, back to the drawing board.
Just an idea.........
Groundloop.
@Groundloop,
That's what I was saying! There should be NO impedance if the toroidal field is maintained totally within the core.
Just wind the coil, add the magnets and match a good capacitor to create a resonate circuit.
Apply the correct frequency and THEN place it into the output coil. If the toroidal coils field is truly maintained within the core, the frequency should never change because there is no coupling of the windings.
If this is true, then you could continue to match the output winding to twice the input frequency, and everything would operate as expected.
-
Good evening ALL,
An interesting night, indeed. I have spent the evening cleaning up my connections of all six of my output coil, and then also, increased the resistor value to 33O ohms, but with coils in parallel, it ohmed out at 43.1
Now, check out this strange fact: ;D
NEW OUTPUT:
5.7 V
43.1 R
0.13225 I
0.75382 P
Did simply fixing all of the loose output leads make that much of a differance to where the power output is now over double? (Edit: Nearly tripled!)
Is something wrong in the resistance measurments, somehow?
Is my strange creation liking the higher resistance and is having an accumulative affect on one another? (I'd like to think this is the answer!)
I plan on increasing the Resistance and seeing if it changes the power output any more.... I will let you all know!
Cheers,
Bruce
EDIT: Found that Alligator clip was off of top coil! Now attached...Now even better!! hehehe (mad scientist laugh! )
NEW POWER FACTOR:
5.7 V
36.8 R
0.15489 I
0.88287 Power
-
Okay electronic gurus...please tell me why when I put a resistor that Ohms out at 807 ohms, IN Parallel, as my load, and check the resistance, it reads 39.6 Ohms.
Each of my 6 brooks output coils ohm out at about 254 ohms individually and ALL 6 are wired in parallel for the output. No diodes, no caps.
If I could have some help here, to make sure that I am calculating the power factor correctly. Thank you.
EDIT:
I tried several other resistors and could not get a resistance above 41 ohms. All the resistors I tried resulted in about the same or a little less power.
That is it for tonight. I have glued up some plastic pieces that I will be winding as a "center solonoid bias" to drop into the center hole. Between it and the outer bias already in place, it should assist in strengthening the b field...we will see. ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
EDIT 2:
P.S. Output Frequency is 48 Hz, give or take, about what the rotor is switching. Duty cycle is 60% now.
-
Okay electronic gurus...please tell me why when I put a resistor that Ohms out at 807 ohms, IN Parallel, as my load, and check the resistance, it reads 39.6 Ohms.
Each of my 6 brooks output coils ohm out at about 254 ohms individually and ALL 6 are wired in parallel for the output. No diodes, no caps.
If I could have some help here, to make sure that I am calculating the power factor correctly. Thank you.
EDIT:
I tried several other resistors and could not get a resistance above 41 ohms. All the resistors I tried resulted in about the same or a little less power.
That is it for tonight. I have glued up some plastic pieces that I will be winding as a "center solonoid bias" to drop into the center hole. Between it and the outer bias already in place, it should assist in strengthening the b field...we will see. ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
EDIT 2:
P.S. Output Frequency is 48 Hz, give or take, about what the rotor is switching. Duty cycle is 60% now.
the following formula give me 40 ohm close to your measurement.
-
the following formula give me 40 ohm close to your measurement.
Awesome Wings! Thank you very much. I have got to make sure that I was not screwin' up the power calculation somehow. I am just astounded that I am nearly at 1 Watt of power output by tweaking, and have still not yet added high speed switching. That will be the last thing that I add. I still have a few more experiments to try and still boost output and then there are a few things I am going to try, to try to reduce input power, while not affecting the output.
Thank you again,
Bruce
-
That 10k in input is probably a copy-paste mistake. It won't even work with 10k there. See this earlier diagram, which shows a correct value of 1 ohm.
So the real input must be: (4*4*0.85)/(1+1.1) = 6W
Naudin have updated the circuit changing the resistance in series with the toroid from 10 kom down to 220 ohm.
the new calculation give output / input ratio down from 98 to 2.2 anyway more than 1.
-
Evening All,
This evening, I have added a "center" pick up coil. I plan on setting this up as a resonant tank.
It ohmed out at 1 ohm.
It's stand alone power:
.138 V
.9 R
0.25333 I
0.02116 P
Tomorrow I am going to wind my new toroid, and see if I can put the Steorn magnet motor in series with my 1 Watt SSG3. This will do several things for me, not the least, speeding up my switching, greatly. ;)
I ordered many electronic part this evening. I have three circuit to build to start with, and making my inner coil a resonant tank.
Circuit 1 is JLN Labs output circuit, this should give me more available power on my output.
Circuit 2 is a new switching circuit, that will run off of a rechargable D-cell Battery to power my SSG3 and Steorn Magnet Motor.
Circuit 3 is a Radiant Energy battery recharger, to recharge the battery, as well.
Lastly, If I see an increase in power on the output at the higher switching and I see I can get everything working on ONE D cell, then it is time to invest in six more brooks coils and to build another module. I will have 1 more toroid not doing anything. 1 for Steorn, 2 for SSG3 Module 1, and 1 for SSG3 Module 2. This is my plan.... :)
Night,
Bruce
-
Naudin have updated the circuit changing the resistance in series with the toroid from 10 kom down to 220 ohm.
the new calculation give output / input ratio down from 98 to 2.2 anyway more than 1.
I still think the output is not being calculated correctly.
I guess you can't compare the rectified output with un-rectified input. Both input and output must be rectified to get a meaningful value, or use pulse integration on both input and output side. If JLN is reading this, he will see my concern.
Now about lambda,
From the traces in Episode 6, we can see that the voltage of mag pulse is about -6V (for 300us) and that of demag pulse is 3.5V (for 500us), so the lambda per cycle is = 3.5^2*500 / 6^2*300 = 0.57
(Assuming both pulses are dumped in a load of value R, which cancels out anyway)
So, I have no idea why its coming 13.7 for rectified case.
He says there - "Shorter the clock pulse (low DTC) is, lower the energy spent for the magnetization process will be.", but he is using 85% DTC in Episode 7, which is too high for this statement to be true. I have no idea whats going on here, its all so confusing :)
-
Right. I already said almost the same. Naudin is measuring peak voltages instead of rms voltages. This gives completely false results.
It looked to me like his Output, BOTH of them is DC, nearly straightline. So how can you say he is measuring peak voltages, giving false results?
-
@exnihiloest,
This thread is about people working on solid state Orbo like systems
and NOT about JNL measurements. If you want a lengthy discussion
about measurements errors etc. then please do it somewhere else.
Groundloop.
-
Overunity only exists when the output power can charge a larger battery than the input battery, with a larger amount of joules than in the input battery.
No need for complicated calculations.
-
@Rapadura,
I agree. The other way is to loop the output back to the input.
If the circuit is over unity then the input battery will charge.
G.
-
Can anyone tell me if the Metglas and Finemet shielding film offered by this company can be rolled into high permiability cores? http://http://www.lessemf.com/mag-shld.html
-
@Airstriker,
I never said that the JNL device should not be discussed.
What I said that I did not want a lengthy discussion
about measurements errors etc.
OK?
Groundloop.
-
Groundloop, the point is...2SGen IS a solid state ORBO! Don't you see the exact same configuration of core and magnet ? The difference is that in 2SGen you have one magnet placed inside the toroid core. In orbo you have 2 magnets facing the toroid core. However, it doesn't really change the effect, as in 2SGen this one magnet acts exactly in the same way as the ORBO's two magnets. You also have N S here. So yes, I think this device should actually be discussed here.
There is a huge difference in discussing the 2SGen device and having a lengthy discussion on measurement errors,etc. You have really poor reading comprehension while misinterpreting what you read and this causes major distractions and flame wars. This example repeats itself over and over again. I'm tired of it. I don't know if this is intentional or not, but it needs to stop.
GB
-
Good Morning ALL,
Well, another small leap for Power Output of my SSG3... ;D While dropping the power input a little as an added bonus!
In reading through this Patent:
http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=WO&NR=2009065219A1&KC=A1&FT=D&date=20090528&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP
I realized that I had no Core. I had experimented only with my Steel large pieces and iron powder nano sticks. So, I decided to cut some lamination, it is steel wire, insulated. Taped the tops and bottom and stuck them under the toroid at the top. Toroid MUST be directly on the top of the laminations to work. On the sides of laminations, and nothing.
So, now I will take this to the next conclusion, and try out different cores.
It is strange, as the volts read about 5.7 to 5.8 and all of a sudden, jump up to 12 and then down to a very steady 6.8 volts, at 63% duty cycle at about 48 Hz.
New Power Output:
V 6.88
R 43.3
I 0.15889
P 1.09315
Center Coil Output:
V .200
R .9
I 0.22222
P 0.0444
-
Severe error in JL Naudin's measurement (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/2SGenMDtest.gif).
Each capacitor charges at the maximum positive respectively negative voltage peak then the mid point of the capacitors is just in between.
Thus the voltage reference for the capacitor is not the zero voltage of the flat step of the signal (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/2sg2b.jpg - blue line). It is lower because of the higher absolute value of the negative pulse.
Consequently a part of the magnetization energy is accounted for demagnetization energy.
In such measurements without symmetry between positive and negative wave forms, only rms voltage measurements can give correct results.
Severe misinformation. You mixed the circuit in Episode 7 with the scope shots of Episode 6 (take a look at the two reference links to the images above and compare). You can't do this. There are two circuits in Episode 7 which separates the demagnetization phase from the magnetization phase, thus some of the magnetization energy can not be accounted for in the demagnetization phase in Episode 7.
After the pulse has ended for the magnetization phase, the core is still being magnetized due to a lag in induction and this is known as magnetic viscosity. This lag in induction is what you see as some of the magnetization energy being accounted for in the demagnetization phase in Episode 6.
In Episode 7, Naudin has two circuits which separates the demag phase from the mag phase, so your arguments and analysis is an obvious and intentional attempt to derail this thread. Why are the moderators of this forum allowing this behavior to continue?
GB
-
Hello again ALL,
Well, another small break through, as I have changed core material from insulated steel wire, to uninsulate soft iron wire coated with a thin coat of oxide. I still have plenty of more room for more laminations. Please remember, there is a magnet at the bottom of the laminations, that is on top of the bottom toroid.
New Power Output:
V 7.26
R 43.3
I 0.16767
P 1.2173 WATTS
Center Coil Power Output:
V .239
R .9
I 0.26556
P 0.06347
Cheers all,
Bruce
-
Hello again,
Two more discoveries, one on purpose and one by accident!
First, I added to very tiny magnets, in attraction to one another, on the sides of the core, about half way up.
Next, a "lego" piece moved, and the green toroid that you see in the foreground, was attracted to the magnet, standing on end. Both resulted in a new output power total:
New Output Power:
V 7.65
R 43.5
I 0.17586
P 1.34531
Now, please remember these toroids are already in series, doing nothing, because I am out of Brooks coils...So, I wondered what would happen if I put my big toroid there in the place of the green one, up against my magnet... (magnet says, "UP" by the way, because if it is facing the wrong direction, forget about it...LOL)
NEW POWER OUTPUT:
V 7.9
R 43.6
I 0.18119
P 1.43138 Watts
New Power Output on Center Coil
V .261
R .9
I 0.29
P 0.07569
-
Naudin released Episode 8: 2SGen simulation with FEMM, towards more output power..., http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#simulation
GB
-
Hello All,
I got to thinking about my tiny magnets on core and decided to test with out them, since only test was with them and with new toroid next to the large magnet. Well it is better WITHOUT tiny magnets on soft iron laminate core.
New Ouput:
V 8.02
R 43.6
I 0.18394
P 1.47516 Watt's
-
There's a big difference between people who try to sound smarter than they really are and cause allot of confusion and others who really know their stuff and make the subject understandable. I have no trouble following JLN's tutorials and the contributions of Nicolay Zaev, but some of the comments that find their way into this forum amount to just a bunch of egotistical baffle gouge!
-
Brilliant post exnihiloest ! So actually no doubts that it's the magnet's field that's producing electricty in 2SGen (magnet interacting with the cylindrical coil). And the energy needed to make this flux leakage (Input energy that can partially by recycled) is equal to the energy needed to go from the MH curve's operating point (set by the magnet) to the MH curve's saturation point. What you will actually do by this energy pulse is only half core's saturation, but this is totally enough to release the magnet's flux. And this is shown by Naudin's Episode 8. But what I trully don't understand is why Naudin doesn't want to accept these facts ?
Maybe we're wrong - where ?
@GB
It's actually time loss to argue with you, so I won't. Say what you want - I don't care.
There is an unurled A-potential connected to the localized B-field that is confined inside the core. This uncurled A-potential is present in the confinement zone and in the space outside it. In space, outside the B-field localization zone, there now appears an uncovered field-free magnetic vector potential A component that extends around the pickup coil. So, all the B-field energy is still in the confinement zone, and outside it there is an additional curl-free A-potential energy. When we perturb the B-field in the localization zone, we also perturb the “inside†portion of that constant A-potential extending on out into space beyond the core and into the pickup coil.
We create a perturbation signal in that uncurled A-potential, traveling in all directions from its “beginning†inside the localization zone on out into its main body (energy reservoir) in the space outside and beyond. By localizing the curled A-component (localizing the B-field change component and holding it in a specific volume), then outside the localized B-field confinement area there appears an “uncovered†curl-free magnetic vector potential A. That represents a change to the EM energy density of the space-time outside the localization region, and so that outer space-time now has extra EM energy from which appreciable E-field energy will flow through the pickup coil and can be extracted easily by mere perturbation.
The energy extracted from outside the core will always flow in the same direction towards the core. This is the very reason why the eOrbo motor will run in the same direction regardless of the polarity of the input pulse from the battery.
Perturbing a force-free potential or a force-free field in space does not involve force, power, or work. So the force-free perturbation can be work-free, generated by the perturbation of the input signal to the input coil.
In 1892, Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the Heaviside theory (a highly curtailed version of Maxwell’s theory) just to obtain simpler equations easier to solve algebraically, thus reducing the need for use of numerical methods. He thereby arbitrarily discarded all of nature’s asymmetrical Maxwellian systems, such as those producing the Aharonov-Bohm effect, the Berry phase, and the geometric phase. He also discarded (arbitrarily) all Maxwellian systems that can accept and use excess EM energy from the active vacuum, since any such system is an asymmetric Maxwellian system a priori.
This video is off-topic but the first minute of the video mentions how the powers that be, more than 150 years ago publicly funded the top scientific community while controlling and suppressing the truth (this supports the above paragraph and is the only reason a reference is being made to it), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgmmCe1GGwg
Deceptions on a grand scale is still happening today. The rabbit hole runs very deep. Don't allow the elitists to continue bamboozling and hood-winking us into deception and slavery. Take off the blind-folds and see the truth. The truth shall set you free (literally).
Don't continue to allow the facts to be twisted by the powers that be or anyone here on this forum. This has been going on for way to long. Let's put a stop to it, right now. Naudin is on the right path. There are those waiting for Steorn to disclose the fundamentals behind this technology, but they are overlooking how Naudin is disclosing it right before their eyes without taking notice. I hope this post and what Naudin is doing, will burn each and every one of the dis-informants here, to the very core of their being.
GB
-
@all
I started fiddling around so far i get the same output magnet or not.
-
Whose theory is it this time ? I will not argue with that as I don't trully understand it. You should do the same if you don't understand mine.
In modern physics the magnetic vector potential A is absolutely required and well-known. Modern electrodynamics (such as quantum electrodynamics, gauge field theory, Yang-Mills theory, etc.) recognize the potentials as the primary realities, and the fields as just changes in the more primary potentials. Modern electromagnetic physics is not just a simple Lorentz-symmetrized classical EM concept! Instead, to deal with EM systems that are asymmetric and therefore permitted to extract and use excess EM energy from the active vacuum, one must have as general an appreciation as possible for the A-potential and its importance.
Thousands of theorists and experimentalists have verified the effects both experimentally and theoretically, and they are continuing to discover new related effects as well. Any person trained only in CEM/EE who proclaims that all these scientists and experiments are false – and that the A-potential and such effects do not even exist, or that vacuum engineering by EM methods is impossible – is still very much in denial and in the dark ages.
I've posted information on the uncurled A-Potential in the other thread way back. I don't mention it much and I try to use other terminology instead in order to avoid negative feedback. Actually, you can see a reference to it in every post I have made. The reference is located right below the number of posts I have made. It's been there for a long time.
People seem to fear what they don't know, so I try to use terminology they are familiar with so it's more likely accepted. This also fails most of the time. We are very close to the real deal. I feel it. This is very important to me. I don't want our species to be enslaved by the powers that be; due to deception, suppression, etc. This is the reason why I'm so serious about this. If I appear to get upset from time to time, it's only because I care. If I didn't care, then it wouldn't bother me.
GB
-
Hello ALL,
I must be taking the resistance reading incorrectly... :o
I clipped the resistor I have had across the leads, and placed 4 10mm LED's rated at 50ma each, 5 volts there. The resistance reads 49.9 ohms
New Power Output ???
V 20.88
R 49.9
I 0.41844
P 8.73709 WATTS ???
Is my resistance reading wrong?
NEW FREQUENCY: 500 Hz Duty Cycle: 64%
All I did was clip the resistor I have had on there since I was back at 4 volts, and put in some honker LED's.
Input: .250 I, 12 V, 3 P(watts)
Not knowing what to think,
Bruce
-
Here's a good image of the uncurled A-Potential of a toroid. The uncurled A potential actually fills the space around the toroid in all directions. The EM pulses will flow from the space outside of the toroid into the core when the B-field is perturbed from inside due to it also perturbing the uncurled A-Potential outside of the core.
GB
-
There are in fact a number of patents dealing with the curl-free magnetic vector potential (A Potential). This is not just some B.S. Theory.
For a few examples, see the several patents by Raymond C. Gelinas (these are assigned to Honeywell). The curl-free magnetic vector potential may in fact be used for direct transmission of communications. These patents are:
(1) Gelinas, Raymond C., "Apparatus and Method for Determination of a Receiving Device Relative to a Transmitting Device Utilizing a Curl-Free Magnetic Vector Potential Field." U.S. Patent No. 4,447,779, May 8, 1984.
(2) Gelinas, Raymond C., "Apparatus and Method for Modulation of a Curl-Free Magnetic Vector Potential Field." U.S. Patent No. 4,429,288, Jan. 31, 1984.
(3) Gelinas, Raymond C., "Apparatus and Method for Demodulation of a Modulated Curl-Free Magnetic Vector Potential." U.S. Patent No. 4,429,280, Jan 31, 1984.
(4) Gelinas, Raymond C., “Josephson Junction Interferometer Device for detection of Curl-Free Magnetic Vector Potential field.†U.S. Patent No. 4,491,795, 1 Jan 1985.
(6) Gelinas, Raymond C., “Apparatus and Method for Distance Determination between Receiving Device and Transmitting Device utilizing a Curl-Free Magnetic Vector Potential Field.†U.S. Patent No. 4,605,897, 12 Aug 1986.
(7) Gelinas, Raymond C., "Apparatus and Method for Transfer of Information by Means of a Curl-Free Magnetic Vector Potential Field." U.S. Patent No. 4,432,098, Feb.14, 1984.
“A system for transmission of information using a curl-free magnetic vector potential radiation field. The system includes current-carrying apparatus for generating a magnetic vector potential field with a curl-free component coupled to apparatus for modulating the current applied to the field generating apparatus. Receiving apparatus includes a detector with observable properties that vary with the application of an applied curl-free magnetic vector potential field. Analyzing apparatus for determining the information content of modulation imposed on the curl-free vector potential field can be established in materials that are not capable of transmitting more common electromagnetic radiation.â€
To show an example of the increasingly widespread use of the effect, see Kazuhito Fujii “Quantum Interference Device and Method for Processing Electron Waves Utilizing Real Space Transfer,†U. S. Patent No. 5157467, Oct. 20, 1992. The abstract is as follows:
“A quantum interference device includes a source, a drain and waveguides with quantum structures between the source and the drain. An electron wave from the source that is confined in the waveguides is split into plural electron waves. The phase difference between the split electron waves is controlled and the split electron waves are combined into a single electron wave. The combined electron wave is directed to the drain or out of the waveguides according to an energy state of the combined electron wave by a real space transfer such as a tunneling effect. The phase difference control may be achieved by varying an electric field, a magnetic field, or light.†Dr. Tonomura, who rigorously validated the Aharonov-Bohm effect to settle the issue once and for all {22}, also holds some 30 patents in Japan, some of which depend on the Aharonov-Bohm effect. Dr. Tonomura is a noted Japanese scientist with many awards. He is a Hitachi Fellow and a member of the Science Council of Japan. As a final example, the U.S. Patent Office recognizes Class 257, subclass E21.089, Multistep processes for manufacture of device using quantum interference effect, e.g., electrostatic Aharonov-Bohm effect (EPO).
GB
-
Hello ALL,
I must be taking the resistance reading incorrectly... :o
I clipped the resistor I have had across the leads, and placed 4 10mm LED's rated at 50ma each, 5 volts there. The resistance reads 49.9 ohms
New Power Output ???
V 20.88
R 49.9
I 0.41844
P 8.73709 WATTS ???
Is my resistance reading wrong?
NEW FREQUENCY: 500 Hz Duty Cycle: 64%
All I did was clip the resistor I have had on there since I was back at 4 volts, and put in some honker LED's.
Input: .250 I, 12 V, 3 P(watts)
Not knowing what to think,
Bruce
-
@Bruce:
I apologize for all of the postings. I didn't mean to bury what you're working on. I hope someone can answer your question. Keep up the good work.
GB
-
Hey Bruce
Thats one heck of an input/output ratio.
Led's sometimes have funny affects on these circuits. Ive seen good and bad.
We might think at times that they are just low power signaling devices but they can have dramatic affects on a circuit one way or the other or nada. =]
Mags
-
Thank you GB.
@ ALL
I removed the LED's, and the voltage is still about 23.45 volts ac. Resistance is showing 49.7.
Somehow, the feedback in the coils did not like that resistor across the leads. I had a eureka moment, clipped the resistor, and have now gone from 8 volts to over 20 volts.
Also, without the LED's, the frequency is still at 500 Hz and drops quickly of course as the rotor winds down.
3 watts in and ohms law is telling me nearly 9 watts out. But, I just don't know, something is nagging at me about the resistance reading but I can't put my finger on it.
I expected the voltage to drop without the LED's but it did not. I expected the Hz to drop without the LED's and it did not. Both good signs.
Curious stuff. I did find that the circuit works fine on a 9 volt, but not enough current. But made me happy because I know when my parts come in from digi key, my new circuit (Thanks Alex!) will use a single D cell battery and should drop my input to less then 1/2 a watt.
Then I will add JLN Labs output circuit, magnetization and demagnetization and that should increase the total output. Add another cool simple circuit using feedback to recharge the battery. And then last but not least add an electronic switching. By then, it will be real iteresting to see what happens! I am VERY encouraged and once I drop my input power, I will order up some more Brooks coils... ;) I still have a lonely toroid...hehehe
Night guys,
Bruce
-
Well, I thought I was done...lol
Remember my center "bias" solonoid output coil? It has been by it's self, it did not like being connected to either the output or in series with the toroids and brooks bias. So I left it alone and figured it would be another output coil. I had been told (another secret project some time ago) that a seperate power source was needed for this bias. I should have listened. This center coil now has enough power to really act as a bias.
I had felt the diode I had on it getting hot. I had tried to light an LED on it some time ago, but that was at 4 volt output on the main coils and that hated resistor.
Now, It is lighting two LED's and has .847 P on it. This has now influenced by total unit, drastically. (simply adding two LED's to the center bias coil. :o)
Wait until I make it a resonant tank! hehehe
NEW OUTPUT POWER NUMBERS: (not including central bias coil!)
V 28.5
R 49.6 ??? Can Ohms Law be tricked?
I .5746
P 16.37619
Frequency: Same Duty Cycle: Same
-
@bruce
you mentioned ac output, are you putting in dc? if you are reading dc input and ac output, there is a formula, to rectify. it is not the same thing. i'm sure you know this keep up the great work!
lol
sam
-
Well, I thought I was done...lol
Remember my center "bias" solonoid output coil? It has been by it's self, it did not like being connected to either the output or in series with the toroids and brooks bias. So I left it alone and figured it would be another output coil. I had been told (another secret project some time ago) that a seperate power source was needed for this bias. I should have listened. This center coil now has enough power to really act as a bias.
I had felt the diode I had on it getting hot. I had tried to light an LED on it some time ago, but that was at 4 volt output on the main coils and that hated resistor.
Now, It is lighting two LED's and has .847 P on it. This has now influenced by total unit, drastically. (simply adding two LED's to the center bias coil. :o)
Wait until I make it a resonant tank! hehehe
NEW OUTPUT POWER NUMBERS: (not including central bias coil!)
V 28.5
R 49.6 ??? Can Ohms Law be tricked?
I .5746
P 16.37619
Frequency: Same Duty Cycle: Same
Bruce,
Congratulations on your achievements at this stage of your experiments. We are excited to see the advancements so far. Nevertheless, I found a little bit difficult to follow all the modifications you have done to your original SS Orbo, and would like to ask if it is not so troublesome for you, to re-state the whole set-up, specifying the inductance and resistence of each type of coil, and the configurations of the magnets and laminations and connections between the different coils? I had a difficult time to visualize the most updated setup.
Thank you in advance, and please keep up your excellent work, Bruce.
-
Bruce,
Congratulations on your achievements at this stage of your experiments. We are excited to see the advancements so far. Nevertheless, I found a little bit difficult to follow all the modifications you have done to your original SS Orbo, and would like to ask if it is not so troublesome for you, to re-state the whole set-up, specifying the inductance and resistence of each type of coil, and the configurations of the magnets and laminations and connections between the different coils? I had a difficult time to visualize the most updated setup.
Thank you in advance, and please keep up your excellent work, Bruce.
Good morning!
Each Brooks Coil Ohms out at 254 ohms. There are six of them. Each brooks is wrapped with a 1 ohm bias winding.
The bias winding for the brooks are wired in series with the toroids, which is connected to my circuit. I have no electronic switching as of yet, so I am using the rotor of my mag moto to open/close a reed switch.
There is a center solenoid bias winding that has been slipped into the holes of the top five brooks. There are two small magnets in attraction there at the bottom. This solenoid bias winding is 1 ohm. It is wrapped with 20awg wire.
Since the solenoid bias is hollow, inside of it is a core made up of soft iron wire . This is taped on the top an on the bottom to hold laminations together. Looks ugly but seems to work.
Only the top toroid has a magnet in it. Why? Because this is what works for this set up.
I work about 5 hours on avg. an evening on my SSG3 since I have started and about double that on weekends. So what seems fast to you all reading, is not so fast experimenting. LOL
I can say without a doubt that the magnets affect the output. But so does also, tuning each coil in the sense to make sure it's magnetic field is adding to the output and not diminishing. The same is true with how each bias on each brooks is wired, and also true with the coil orientation of the center solenoid bias. Not hard to do, but very, very tedious.
The brooks coils are manufactured to my specs from another project. We had to pay for tooling etc. Which we still own.
Attached is a drawing that I posted earlier, but I have added more labels. I have photo's postd of each step and with the drawing, should assist you in understanding.
I still think there is an issue with resistance measurement because everything is in parallel. I am not sure how reliable it is for measuring current usng ohms law and would like to hear from a knowledgable electronic guru...
Cheers,
Bruce
-
...
So, all the B-field energy is still in the confinement zone
...
All experiments that I conducted prove it is false.
An hour ago, I was pulsing a toroid coil with pulses at low frequency around 100hz, strong enough to saturate the core. I held a magnet near the coil and it vibrated in my hand under the effect of the leakage fields from the toroid!
Imagine a half toroidal ferrite core with a coil. It is like a horseshoe magnet: the field lines loop from one end to the other but they don't follow a circular path, they expand around (see: http://www.vizimag.com/horseshoe-246p-256c-b.gif).
Now imagine there is another half toroidal air coil facing the first one, connected in series and looping the toroid. Do you really think that the second half coil will significantly change the flux from the first one, when it has a very low magnetic permeability because of no core? Certainly not, the flux from the first half core will remain almost the same.
It is what is going on in Orbo and 2Sgen: the saturation causes gaps in permeability along the toroid, then flux leakages that can be recovered by coupling another coil (2Sgen) or that can be used to influence near magnet motion (Orbo).
-
All experiments that I conducted prove it is false.
An hour ago, I was pulsing a toroid coil with pulses at low frequency around 100hz, strong enough to saturate the core. I held a magnet near the coil and it vibrated in my hand under the effect of the leakage fields from the toroid!
The magnets vibrated due to it's field perturbing the localized region of the B-Field located inside the toroid, which perturbed the uncurled A-Potential outside the toroid where your magnets were. This caused your magnets to vibrate.
You automatically rule out the uncurled A Potential outside the toroid that is connected to the curled B-Field inside the toroid. You really think a small amount of flux leakage due to near or full-saturation can induce a relatively large EMF in a pickup coil? The small amount of flux leakage will drop off in strength dramatically as you increase the distance from the toroid. This means it won't cut many layers of wires in a pickup coil in order to induce a decent amount of EMF. Where are the poles in a toroid coil?
If you perturb the B-Field inside the toroid (the localized region), then you will perturb the uncurled A-Potential that is surrounding the outside space of a toroid. The uncurled A-Potential is also connected to the B-field in the localized region. Perturbing it represents a change to the EM energy density of the space-time outside the localization region, and so that outer space-time now has extra EM energy from which appreciable E-field energy can be extracted easily by mere perturbation.
I don't care if you agree with this or not. The A-Potential is already proven and is the only reasonable explanation for a relatively large EMF to be induced in the pickup coil. It's not due to the small leakage flux, sorry.
Naudin is already working on perturbing this A-Potential even more to increase the power output, from what I have seen in Episode 8. This will be interesting.
GB
-
Nickolay E. Zaev's ¨Ferrites and Ferromagnetics Free Energy Generation¨ article begins with a proportion that assesses the quality of ferromagnetic materials based on specific (Wt/Kg) loss appearing in the process of magnetic reversal at a frequency and induction ratio: Can anyone tell me if this a Biefield Brown effect Zaev is outlining here? Does the toroid gain and loose weight during it's change in magnetization and demagnetization along with temperature changes?
-
All experiments that I conducted prove it is false.
An hour ago, I was pulsing a toroid coil with pulses at low frequency around 100hz, strong enough to saturate the core. I held a magnet near the coil and it vibrated in my hand under the effect of the leakage fields from the toroid!
exnihiloest, if I were you, I wouldn't loose any more time writting here. I don't know if you have noticed, but all our posts have been deleted in this thread. This is not how people should be treated when they commit their free time to do something for others. So I don't care any more. If these people like, they can walk in the dark for the next decade.
I'm unfortunately starting to understand PL's decision to leave this forum. Sad it is.
-
@All,
I want this thread to be a place for researching solid state Orbo like systems.
You can post your result, images and links to videos. Off topic posts will be
deleted.
@Exnihiloest, @Airstriker
Please make you own thread where you can post whatever you like.
Groundloop.
-
Hello All,
I have been trying to find my math mistake all day, but can not. Yet it does not feel like 16 watts of power when lighting up various items.
Each Brooks coil is 254 Ohms. This is a fact.
All 6 are in parallel. This is a fact.
Using the formula 254/6 gives a resistance of 42.3, and I am at 49.3 reading on the meter. This is a fact.
Voltage remains relatively the same in each inductor, so I am producing 28 volts at output. This is a fact.
If I were to take that voltage of 28 for each inductor at 254 ohms, that would give me a current of 0.11024 per coil, or .66144 I with all 6 coils in parallel.
With an I of .66144 this gives me a total power output of 18.52 watts.
But where is the current? Is it still stored in the inductor? Because I am not seeing .66144 of current. I see the voltage. I do the math and see the resistance. I read the resistance on the meter. But I am not seeing the current on the meter.
So, I am seeing far less current then ohms law tells me should be there, or is it all being stored in the magnetic fields of the inductors? Any math assistance would be of help.
Thank you,
Bruce
EDIT:
I have removed the iron lamination core and now the voltage is at 5.2 volts on the main output, with very dim lights indeed.
-
Hi Bruce,
I think you can consider your 6 parallel coils as one "secondary" coil of a hypotetical transformer, with 28V AC output voltage and the DC resistance of this 'coil' is about 49 Ohm.
Now if you would use a 49 Ohm load resistor (any wattage) in parallel with your 'coil' output, and your measurements are correct, then you should find about 28/2=14V AC output voltage across the load resistor (i.e. at the 'coil' output) because the inner coil 49 Ohm resistance constitutes a voltage divider with your outside 49 Ohm load resistor, hence the output voltage is halved.
Try to do this and if this is ok, you may go further on. For AC voltage measurement, use the same meter what you used for measuring the 28V output measurement.
rgds, Gyula
-
Hi Bruce,
I highlighted your text what is the culprit....
....
If I were to take that voltage of 28 for each inductor at 254 ohms, that would give me a current of 0.11024 per coil, or .66144 I with all 6 coils in parallel.
With an I of .66144 this gives me a total power output of 18.52 watts.
But where is the current? Is it still stored in the inductor? Because I am not seeing .66144 of current. I see the voltage. I do the math and see the resistance. I read the resistance on the meter. But I am not seeing the current on the meter.
...
You cannot calculate current like that because the inner DC resistance of any one coil is 254 Ohms and if you short circuit such coil with a piece of wire, while there is 28V induced voltage across this coil, then your total 28V is dissipated in the inner 254 Ohm resistor. (To be more precise the inductive reactance of the coil comes in series with the 254 Ohm copper resistance to establish an series RL circuit, the inductive reactance is XL=2*pi*f*L where f is the AC output frequency and L is inductance of the coil in question. So the total impedance the shorted current 'sees' is Z=sqr(R2+X2L )
rgds, Gyula
-
Hi Bruce,
I think you can consider your 6 parallel coils as one "secondary" coil of a hypotetical transformer, with 28V AC output voltage and the DC resistance of this 'coil' is about 49 Ohm.
Now if you would use a 49 Ohm load resistor (any wattage) in parallel with your 'coil' output, and your measurements are correct, then you should find about 28/2=14V AC output voltage across the load resistor (i.e. at the 'coil' output) because the inner coil 49 Ohm resistance constitutes a voltage divider with your outside 49 Ohm load resistor, hence the output voltage is halved.
Try to do this and if this is ok, you may go further on. For AC voltage measurement, use the same meter what you used for measuring the 28V output measurement.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
I have tried this, and the result is an output of 1.7 volts ac, so what does that now tell us? It should have been about 12 or 13 volts. I am running now about 25 or 26 volts steady.
I knew if no one else could figure this out, you would...LOL
Thanks!
Bruce
-
Evening ALL,
Earlier today, I had a bit of frustration. I had taken the core of soft iron laminations out of the center and tested as I posted earlier.
When putting it back, I could not get more than 5 volts. Then I thought to use a compass on the soft iron laminations and realized they had been lightly magnatized, North down, and South pole up. I found this interesting, and when reinserted correctly (as per the unit's liking), the voltage was back up.
I am personally convinced that it is "transforming" the input power created from the toroids and magnets, within the center core and increasing voltage at the sake of the current. This is my theory for now.
I am looking forward to getting my electronic parts in. The whole Ideas was to optimize as much as possible before bringing in the "big gun" which is the electronic high speed switching.
I feel that redoing the the circuit to run on 0.45 watts using a D-Cell is the next step. And then go from there.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hello All,
I have been trying to find my math mistake all day, but can not. Yet it does not feel like 16 watts of power when lighting up various items.
Each Brooks coil is 254 Ohms. This is a fact.
All 6 are in parallel. This is a fact.
Using the formula 254/6 gives a resistance of 42.3, and I am at 49.3 reading on the meter. This is a fact.
Voltage remains relatively the same in each inductor, so I am producing 28 volts at output. This is a fact.
If I were to take that voltage of 28 for each inductor at 254 ohms, that would give me a current of 0.11024 per coil, or .66144 I with all 6 coils in parallel.
With an I of .66144 this gives me a total power output of 18.52 watts.
But where is the current? Is it still stored in the inductor? Because I am not seeing .66144 of current. I see the voltage. I do the math and see the resistance. I read the resistance on the meter. But I am not seeing the current on the meter.
So, I am seeing far less current then ohms law tells me should be there, or is it all being stored in the magnetic fields of the inductors? Any math assistance would be of help.
Thank you,
Bruce
EDIT:
I have removed the iron lamination core and now the voltage is at 5.2 volts on the main output, with very dim lights indeed.
Bruce,
Sorry to hear about your frustration in measuring the output power. Please allow me to give you my point of view in regard to your problem.
I think it is due to phase factor of the V and I in the output. Since it is in AC and also it involves with many inductive components, there is a phase factor issue in your output: the voltage is not in phase with the current. If your correct the phase factor with a capacitor bank, maybe you can see the power. Also, the digital meters are no good for measuring AC above 60Hzs, because they are designed for measuring the Grid V and Amps.
If I am wrong, please forgive my ignorance. Anyway, please keep up your good work, We are pending on your great experments.
-
All experiments that I conducted prove it is false.
An hour ago, I was pulsing a toroid coil with pulses at low frequency around 100hz, strong enough to saturate the core. I held a magnet near the coil and it vibrated in my hand under the effect of the leakage fields from the toroid!
Imagine a half toroidal ferrite core with a coil. It is like a horseshoe magnet: the field lines loop from one end to the other but they don't follow a circular path, they expand around (see: http://www.vizimag.com/horseshoe-246p-256c-b.gif).
Now imagine there is another half toroidal air coil facing the first one, connected in series and looping the toroid. Do you really think that the second half coil will significantly change the flux from the first one, when it has a very low magnetic permeability because of no core? Certainly not, the flux from the first half core will remain almost the same.
It is what is going on in Orbo and 2Sgen: the saturation causes gaps in permeability along the toroid, then flux leakages that can be recovered by coupling another coil (2Sgen) or that can be used to influence near magnet motion (Orbo).
@exnihiloest
So what are you thinking?
When the coil is in the off state of the pulse, the magnet attracts to the core, and when the coil is in the saturated state, the magnet is no longer attracted.
This will cause a pulsing of a nearby magnet.
At what point exactly did you expect to NOT feel the pulse?
How does your experiment prove leakage of field?
-
Evening All,
Last experiment of the evening...
You know, all along, I thought it strange that my toroids are not getting hot. Not even warm. I figured that it was simply because I am running only at 70% duty cycle, and not very long at that.
But a bit ago, I was feeling my toroids again, after an extended period of operating, and the one I was feeling actually felt cooler than room temperature.
I did a temp reading and when it was not operating, it was at 68 deg F. Room temperature. When I turned it on, and put the probe in the core, it dropped to 44 deg F. And I put my finger in the core also and felt a cool breeze.
Tried it some more times, and it always drops temp in the core. Sometimes 54, sometimes 58 F. and sometimes 44 F.
I think I will borrow a laser thermometer tomorrow from work and check one more time. It is kinda freaky feeling a cold inside hole of a toroid.
I only checked the outside toroid that is pressed against the large magnet that is pressed against the outside of the brooks coil.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
@Bruce_TPU
The brooks coils are manufactured to my specs from another project. We had to pay for tooling etc. Which we still own.
I'd like to replicate your work - is there a way I could purchase some Brooks Coils from you since you already own the tooling for their manufacture? Or maybe just provide your suppliers contact information?
Thanks much!
-
Evening All,
Last experiment of the evening...
You know, all along, I thought it strange that my toroids are not getting hot. Not even warm. I figured that it was simply because I am running only at 70% duty cycle, and not very long at that.
But a bit ago, I was feeling my toroids again, after an extended period of operating, and the one I was feeling actually felt cooler than room temperature.
I did a temp reading and when it was not operating, it was at 68 deg F. Room temperature. When I turned it on, and put the probe in the core, it dropped to 44 deg F. And I put my finger in the core also and felt a cool breeze.
Tried it some more times, and it always drops temp in the core. Sometimes 54, sometimes 58 F. and sometimes 44 F.
Weren't some of the Orbo replicators reporting a cooling with their toroids a long time ago in the primary Orbo thread? Any speculation on how this is occurring?
-
@Bruce:
You have my full attention. That is a huge cooling effect. You have some interesting stuff happening in your experiments. Very promising. Great Stuff!
@Void: My toroid coil in my replication attempt ran around room temperature with no noticeable heating and I even heard a hissing noise from time to time coming from the toroid. It also turned my webcam on/off and knocked the signal completely out for my off-air digital TV when the motor was running (I think this was due to not suppressing the spark from my homemade mechanical reed switch though). A few others here have also reported a cooling effect from their replications.
According to the theory on the Adams Motor, the cooling effect is cold electricity with a reversed time flow of negative current (Pulling energy in from the vacuum of space), http://members.fortunecity.com/freeenergy2000/adamsmotor.htm If you can't accept the theory about the negative time flow of current, then you can't deny the effect of cooling that has been reported from many experiments over many years. The effects are there, but we only have theories from observations to explain it.
GB
-
The magnets vibrated due to it's field perturbing the localized region of the B-Field located inside the toroid, which perturbed the uncurled A-Potential outside the toroid where your magnets were.
...
Total nonsense and blah. Please give the equations relating the potential vector to the forces on a permanent magnet!
-
Total nonsense and blah. Please give the equations relating the potential vector to the forces on a permanent magnet!
My response was about as much nonsense as your experiment. Take a look at Lumens response in regards to your experiment. Your experiment and interpertation is total nonsense if you have a look at post #440, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8597.msg231685#msg231685
I can admit my nonsense, can you?
I will give you something to think about though. When the field collapses after the pulse, the flux inside the core disengages and cuts the wires in the toroid and induces an EMF. Why doesn't this induce a sufficient amount of EMF in the pickup coil to light the led's in Naudin's experiment without the magnets? With the magnets, the led's light very brightly and this is evidence of a decent amount EMF induced in the pickup coil. The flux is disengaging from the core due to the field collapsing, with or without the magnets. The magnets must be perturbing some kind of potential due to the field collapsing in order for the led's to light and for there to be more demagnetization energy received than the energy spent for the magnetization.
The led's lighting and the EMF induced in the pickup coil has nothing to do with a small amount of flux leakage due to saturating the toroid because the pickup coil is open during the magnetization phase in Naudin's experiment. Besides, if the field collapsing doesn't induce a decent EMF in the pickup coil without the magnets, then a very large hypothetical flux leakage from saturation isn't going to induce a decent EMF in the pickup coil either.
GB
-
@exnihiloest
So what are you thinking?
When the coil is in the off state of the pulse, the magnet attracts to the core, and when the coil is in the saturated state, the magnet is no longer attracted.
This will cause a pulsing of a nearby magnet.
At what point exactly did you expect to NOT feel the pulse?
How does your experiment prove leakage of field?
Hi Lumen
I was referring to a static permanent magnet near a pulsed coil.
You are right when you say that "the magnet is no longer attracted" when the core is saturated (so if it is static, at each pulse it is shaken because of strong or weak attractions depending on saturation).
But it is just another way to say that the field linking the ferrite core and the magnet is changing. You cannot distinguish the case of a magnet influenced by a ferromagnetic mass with a varying mu, from a magnet influenced by a changing field generated by a ferromagnetic mass. As the second viewpoint perfectly describes what is observed and is in agreement with conventional physics laws, we must apply Okham's razor and consider that Orbo system doesn't involve a new phenomenon. Classical physics gives still the right model.
-
Hi Lumen
I was referring to a static permanent magnet near a pulsed coil.
You are right when you say that "the magnet is no longer attracted" when the core is saturated (so if it is static, at each pulse it is shaken because of strong or weak attractions depending on saturation).
But it is just another way to say that the field linking the ferrite core and the magnet is changing. You cannot distinguish the case of a magnet influenced by a ferromagnetic mass with a varying mu, from a magnet influenced by a changing field generated by a ferromagnetic mass. As the second viewpoint perfectly describes what is observed and is in agreement with conventional physics laws, we must apply Okham's razor and consider that Orbo system doesn't involve a new phenomenon. Classical physics gives still the right model.
Please answer the questions in Lumen's post: You skirted around these questions in your reply.
1) At what point exactly did you expect to NOT feel the pulse?
2) How does your experiment prove leakage of field? This is in reference to saturation, and not in reference to the field collapsing after the pulse.
Do you now see how your experiment is nonsense along with your interpretation of it?
GB
-
...If you can't accept the theory about the negative time flow of current, then you can't deny the effect of cooling ...
Where are the measurements about a cooling effect in Orbo system?
-
Please answer the questions in Lumen's post: You skirted around these questions in your reply.
1) At what point exactly did you expect to NOT feel the pulse?
Wrong question as I expect to feel the pulse
2) How does your experiment prove leakage of field?
A simple probe coil connected to an oscilloscope, near a pulsed toroidal coil. See the trace when it is near saturation.
-
...
The led's lighting and the EMF induced in the pickup coil has nothing to do with a small amount of flux leakage due to saturating the toroid because the pickup coil is open during the magnetization phase in Naudin's experiment.
...
During the magnetization, energy is stored for a part in the magnetic field of the coil and as internal energy for saturation. A voltage is induced in the pickup coil by the leakage flux (see the oscilloscope trace). There is a leakage flux because the permeability is not uniform along the toroid.
During demagnetization, the leakage flux, which is not small, induces voltage in the pickup coil and current in the load.
If the principle was not a leakage flux but permeability modulation, then the toroid plane could be put parallel to the pickup coil plane. But this configuration doesn't work, as well as your thesis.
-
Where are the measurements about a cooling effect in Orbo system?
Why does this cooling effect bother you?
Did I mention anything about a cooling effect in the Orbo system? I said the toroid in my replication attempt of an Orbo had no noticeable heating. The other references to the cooling effect was in regards to the Adams's motor. For those who claimed to have a cooling effect in their experiments, you will need to ask them for the measurements. I'm sure you would say the measurements were wrong for whatever reason (This is what you do).
Don't you think a cooling effect, especially in a solid state device such as what Bruce is working on, is interesting? Of course you do and this bothers you. ;D
GB
-
During the magnetization, energy is stored for a part in the magnetic field of the coil and as internal energy for saturation. A voltage is induced in the pickup coil by the leakage flux (see the oscilloscope trace). There is a leakage flux because the permeability is not uniform along the toroid.
During demagnetization, the leakage flux, which is not small, induces voltage in the pickup coil and current in the load.
If the principle was not a leakage flux but permeability modulation, then the toroid plane could be put parallel to the pickup coil plane. But this configuration doesn't work, as well as your thesis.
The oscilloscope trace is a straight line in Episode 7. How can we see this leakage flux in Episode 7? There are two circuits in Episode 7 and only 1 circuit in Episode 6, so you can't use the oscilloscope trace from Episode 6 for your analysis of Episode 7. This is how you're intentionally trying to twist the facts by mixing two different experiments of your analysis of a single experiment, and you continue to knowingly do this.
You continue to make references about measurements errors even after being warned several times. I don't think we have to worry about you're distractions here any longer.
GB
-
Hi Gyula,
I have tried this, and the result is an output of 1.7 volts ac, so what does that now tell us? It should have been about 12 or 13 volts. I am running now about 25 or 26 volts steady.
I knew if no one else could figure this out, you would...LOL
Thanks!
Bruce
Hi Bruce,
If you measured 1.7V AC output voltage across an OUTSIDE 49 Ohm resistor, and assuming your output frequency is 500Hz, then see the followings.
You have a series L-R closed circuit, fed from (a hypotetical) ideal voltage generator of 25V at 500Hz, see attachment, where L is unknown at the moment, it is the resultant inductivity of the 6 Brooks in parallel, including their mutual inductance due to closeness and some iron cores you use in or near them.
(By the way, you can measure the resultant L to check the calculation that comes below) and R is 49 + 49 Ohm, one is the copper resistance and one is your outside load across which you measured the 1.7V AC.
So the 1.7V across the 49 Ohm means the AC current in the circuit is I=1.7/49= 0.0347A i.e. 34.7mA
The inductive reactance is unknown at the moment, for I do not know the resultant L of your 6 paralleled coils but here is the formula:
XL=2*pi*f*L where f=500Hz (I think)
The total Z impedance that the L and the R constitutes in the circuit is:
Z=sqrt(R2+X2L)
Because we know the AC current is .0347A in this series R-L circuit what the 25V generator maintains, we can calculate the value of Z as Z=25V/.0347A=720.46 Ohm. This equals with the above formula for Z, hence I can calculate L from it:
720.46=sqrt(982+4*pi2*5002*L2) and from this, L can be calculated.
The result for L is L= .2273Henry this is what you can check with an inductance meter, by switching off any power in your circuit, no any load across your output connections, only the L meter, ok?
If you find a significant difference with the L meter from this 227mH inductance, then probably the voltage measurements are way off because I used the 1.7V loaded and the 25V unloaded values you measured.
If you do not have an L meter, no problem, we could assume your measurements and my calculations are more or less ok, this would mean you have a "generator" output that has about the following inner impedance value at 500 Hz output frequency:
Zout=sqrt(492 + (2*pi*500*.2273)2)=sqrt(492+713.722)=714.72 Ohm at 500 Hz.
This is a huge inner impedance for a generator. You can reduce this to as low as the 49 Ohm copper resistance by tuning out the 713 Ohm inductive reactance by a capacitor that also has a 713 Ohm reactance at 500 Hz.
XC=1/(2*pi*500*C) C=1/(2*pi*500*713)= 446 nF, try to use a 470 nF (or two 220 nF in parallel) (non-electrolytic) capacitor IN SERIES with your output to tune out the inductive inner reactance of your coils. You may find the output voltage now across a 49 Ohm resistor as the load now from outside to be closer to 10-12V, hopefully. Do not connect the tuning cap in parallel, only in series with the coil output, then comes the 49 Ohm resistor load.
If my calculations turn out to be way off, then sorry, I used what I have had data available.
rgds, Gyula
PS: I used this link for some background in AC calculations and also took the series RL picture from there, the 37 degree phase angle is of course not valid here. http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_3/3.html
-
Hi Gyula,
Wow, you are good at that Calculus! What a great amount of information.
I am going to redo that experiment tonight with the resistor because, my voltage is now at 30 volts pretty steady on the output.
I will redo it, and let you know what the voltage is across the resistor.
Also, I have no inductance meter, but purchased one last night, so I will be able to take an accurate reading when it arrives and see how close our math is.
Thank you very much for your time and I will get back with you this evening.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
During the magnetization, energy is stored for a part in the magnetic field of the coil and as internal energy for saturation. A voltage is induced in the pickup coil by the leakage flux (see the oscilloscope trace). There is a leakage flux because the permeability is not uniform along the toroid.
During demagnetization, the leakage flux, which is not small, induces voltage in the pickup coil and current in the load.
If the principle was not a leakage flux but permeability modulation, then the toroid plane could be put parallel to the pickup coil plane. But this configuration doesn't work, as well as your thesis.
@exnihiloest
A normally machine wound toroid coil will produce a flux in the parallel plane because the layering of windings are the same as loops of wire in the parallel plane.
-
@Bruce, MCE stands for Magnetic Caloric Effect. It is a Magneto thermodynamic phenomenon which is a reversable change in temperature of a suitable material caused by exposing the material to a changing magnetic field. Materials heat when magnetized and cool when demagnetized. Consult the following link at Wikipedia for a further elaboration.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_refrigeration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_refrigeration)
Zaev reports generating cold and electricity in his experiments with his mag and demag of dielectrics. Think about whats going on. You're accumulating heat loss, and generating electricity simultaneously. The heat loss is greater then 1., the cooling should equal the heating, but it doesn't! It accrues instead!
-
Why does this cooling effect bother you?
...
You said:
"A few others here have also reported a cooling effect from their replications."
If it is not related to Orbo, I suggest you speak elsewhere about the Amdam's motor. It is not the goal of this thread. Thanks.
-
@exnihiloest
A normally machine wound toroid coil will produce a flux in the parallel plane because the layering of windings are the same as loops of wire in the parallel plane.
Right but only one turn/layer should not provide much flux (the 2Sgen pickup coil doesn't recovers energy when it is in the same plane as the toroid).
-
If it is not related to Orbo, I suggest you speak elsewhere about the Amdam's motor. It is not the goal of this thread. Thanks.
The cooling has been shown present in Orbo replications. And the effect looks to be present in the SS Orbo replication by Bruce_TPU. Understanding what we're observing is important, no?
Anyhow - I was reading about the magneto caloric effect - the gist of which is that, as the domains become aligned, entropy decreases, and the extra energy is dissipated as heat.
Ref: http://www.physorg.com/news107183785.html
And when the field is removed, the entropy returns (domains become random again?), and the material cools. In the above linked article, they talk about pumping the heat away with some medium, like water.
My question is though, if you have the material in the field of a magnet, and it generates its heat due to the organization of domains and the decrease in entropy. Then it cools to ambient temperature, so the whole system is at ambient temperature. When the field is removed, it cools - at that point where does the heat go? The only thing happening when the field is removed is the entropy of the ferrite material has increased.
The whole thing strikes me as odd, I probably just need to sit on it for a day or so to wrap my primate brain around it.
-
Right but only one turn/layer should not provide much flux (the 2Sgen pickup coil doesn't recovers energy when it is in the same plane as the toroid).
@exnihiloest
Yes that is correct, there will not be any current generated in that position, but it has nothing to do with the plane of the toroidal coil.
There is no current generated in the parallel plane because both poles of the magnet are in the same plane as the pickup coil and the 90 degree rule cannot apply to even generate power.
I'm beginning to think you are just either an amateur that does not fully understand electrodynamics, or you are hell bent on trying to find some reason why it just can't work.
If you know anything about electrodynamics at all, I would think your time would be better spent looking for solutions to make it work not wasting time on lame excuses of why it can't work when they don't even apply to the condition your trying to apply them to.
I'm thinking right now, there are probably a few hundred companies with a lot of very smart people, working on new products that use this very principal.
Just like the "A field" article that GB mentioned. Makes me think they have been scamming everyone for many years now.
-
I'm beginning to think you are just either an amateur that does not fully understand electrodynamics, or you are hell bent on trying to find some reason why it just can't work.
indeed.
-
The cooling has been shown present in Orbo replications. And the effect looks to be present in the SS Orbo replication by Bruce_TPU. Understanding what we're observing is important, no?
Anyhow - I was reading about the magneto caloric effect - the gist of which is that, as the domains become aligned, entropy decreases, and the extra energy is dissipated as heat.
Ref: http://www.physorg.com/news107183785.html
And when the field is removed, the entropy returns (domains become random again?), and the material cools. In the above linked article, they talk about pumping the heat away with some medium, like water.
My question is though, if you have the material in the field of a magnet, and it generates its heat due to the organization of domains and the decrease in entropy. Then it cools to ambient temperature, so the whole system is at ambient temperature. When the field is removed, it cools - at that point where does the heat go? The only thing happening when the field is removed is the entropy of the ferrite material has increased.
The whole thing strikes me as odd, I probably just need to sit on it for a day or so to wrap my primate brain around it.
@void109
You are close to right, but there was never any extra energy generated or extra heat generated.
The actual effect is that the heat that was in the material, no longer fits in the newly organized shape the magnet has put it in. So the heat moves out and the material gets hot.
If you organize the material quickly with a magnetic field and then remove it again quickly, it never gets hot because the heat is re-absorbed back into the material.
If you place it into the field and let the heat escape, then remove the field, it will try to re-absorb the heat it had and will get colder.
Similar effect as compressing air.
-
Evening ALL,
Well, I reran the coloric experiment with my probe. I could not get the laser today but will try again tomorrow to borrow it.
I took some pictures for you all. Also, this COLD effect (and it is cold, not cool! LOL) is only found in this one toroid, not any of the others. Now, the other two do not get hot, but stay at ambiant temperature the whole time. But not this one... ;) not surprising considering it is next to a honker of a magnet.
Lastly, I would add that there is also a 10 deg temp drop 8" to 12" in front of the hole as well... :o
@ Gyula
The experiment has to be postponed, as my battery is dieing a quick death and is even now being recharged.
Funny, it was fine last night, but I left the leads connected to the battery, and even though I had the switch off on the positive side, it always seems to drain it.
On my last mosfet circuit, I was fooling with a rechargable 9 volt battery. left it connected, even though the switch was off. The next morning the battery was physically shriveled like the insides had been sucked out, and a vacuum from inside had sucked the body inwards. I was pretty surprised...LOL and ever since, for the last couple weeks, I have been disconnecting the leads, until last night. But nothing as drastic as all of that, just missing a third of it's amperage.
I will test tomorrow evening.
Thank you,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
P.S. For anyone wanting brooks coils to play with, I will try to dig up that info for you sometime this weekend. It does take a while for them to be made after ordering because your order is custom made. But they are great coils for all manner of experiments. And we have already paid for the tooling, so a great deal for all of you. And the customer service is always awesome.
-
Hello ALL,
Well, I did decide to do a few more experiments, using another old barely alive battery. I tried to use an aluminum insert into the toroid hole, as a heat sink. My thinking was that it would either heat things up in there, or cool them off a bit more... ;)
I would caution everyone not to get too excited, as I will not really be convinced my self, until I use the laser thermometer. If it says yes, then I can think of some brand new applications.
As the rotor speed slows, and the switching speed slows, the temperature gradually rises.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
I moved this post to the other thread, since it wasn't directly related to a solid state device. It's about an experiment done by E. Rutherford in the late 1800's on magnetic viscosity. Its probably best for any discussion of this article to be in the other thread.
GB
-
You said:
"A few others here have also reported a cooling effect from their replications."
If it is not related to Orbo, I suggest you speak elsewhere about the Amdam's motor. It is not the goal of this thread. Thanks.
The link I posted to the Adams theory also has extensive information on solid state devices based around this thread. You obviously didn't look at the link, if you did then you would know this. There are similarities and both have the same basic principals, so there is some useful information in the reference link I provide that is related to the ssOrbo (especially if Bruce has noticed a cooling effect in his SS device because this has been reported in the Adams replications also).
If my memory serves me correctly, I believe Steorn has said the coils in the Orbo doesn't necessarily have to be a toroid in order to have the effect. The toroid is used to eliminate or reduce the BEMF/CEMF to near 0, but the shape of the toroid itself doesn't produce the effect. If this is the case, then it would make it even more like the concept based around Adams. There is no reason in having a discussion about how relevant my post is to this thread, for it will only lead to another distraction.
GB
-
The cooling has been shown present in Orbo replications. And the effect looks to be present in the SS Orbo replication by Bruce_TPU. Understanding what we're observing is important, no?
...
Hi void109
I knew the magneto caloric effect. What I asked first was "where can we find measurements about a cooling effect in Orbo system?".
"Observing" without measurements in not convincing, question of faith.
The cooling effect when the field is removed is a priori canceled by the heating effect when the field is built. I don't observe cooling in my own experiments. It is the reason of my question.
-
Hi void109
I knew the magneto caloric effect. What I asked first was "where can we find measurements about a cooling effect in Orbo system?".
"Observing" without measurements in not convincing, question of faith.
The cooling effect when the field is removed is a priori canceled by the heating effect when the field is built. I don't observe cooling in my own experiments. It is the reason of my question.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8528.0
GB
-
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8528.0
GB
No measurements of a possible cooling effect in this thread.
-
...There is no current generated in the parallel plane because both poles of the magnet are in the same plane as the pickup coil and the 90 degree rule cannot apply to even generate power.
Only a change of flux through a coil can induce voltage.
The magnet is positioned with one pole facing the plane of the pickup coil and its flux passing through the ferrite core and through the pickup coil.
We know that a permanent magnet does not provide a varying flux then it does not induce voltage in the pickup coil. If it is the saturation of the toroidal coil that modulates the flux from the permanent magnet then it should work when the toroid plane is parallel to the pickup coil plane. But it doesn't.
[/quote]
I'm beginning to think you are just...
...Makes me think they have been scamming everyone for many years now.
Well I see you are going outside science and experiments and you give no logical arguments.
It is very funny to see people pretending that others do not know the laws of physics when all they try to do themselves is to dismiss the principle of energy conservation using the... laws of physics! ;D
-
Here's something interesting. In Episode 7, Naudin's pulse generator was set to 990 Hz. I have a paper from the late 1800's on magnetic viscosity by E. Rutherford, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=375
This paper says soft iron and steel exhibit the effect of magnetic viscosity quite strongly for a frequency at 1,000 or above. Very informative article. It looks like Naudin is working at the right frequencies according to this paper.
Naudin has released episode 9, http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#v6
GB
-
Hello,
If I only knew where to begin with my questions.....................
In Episode 9 of JLN's 2SGen, what is (B-) flux running without magnetisation of toroid, with magnetisation of toroid?
Without magnetisation all flux enters toroid and go 50% cw and 50% ccw inside toroide? How far? Do they reunion at the farest point? Leave toroid, and go back 50%cw and 50% ccw OUTside toroid (in free air) to the notattaching pole of magnet(-stack)?
Or can there be a forward AND backward flux inside toroid?
When magnetising toroid, is the saturation that high, for no more going the magnets flux lines INSIDE the toroid? Does magnets behave like NO toroid was there?
................
IF we generate voltage (current, power) in pickup coil only with curl-free A (changing A), in what direction is the greatest change (x,y,z,t)?
Where does the biggest dA/d(x,y,z,t,...) occur?
How to get highest voltage?
How to get current without bmf?
If my english was better, I could ask for pages...
Regards
magneto_DC
-
When magnetising toroid, is the saturation that high, for no more going the magnets flux lines INSIDE the toroid? Does magnets behave like NO toroid was there?
That's what I and exnihiloest are saying. But nobody seems to agree.
The configuration provided in Episode 9 is in my opinion good and bad at the same time. What is good is that you utilize also the energy stored in the toroid core. What is bad is the fact, that if you would use also the magnetization phase as the output in pickup coil, you would end up with BEMF. That we don't want.
Don't you guys hear that buzzing sound in all Naudin's videos ? I propose an experiment. If it's not the magnet that is "jumping", place some soft rubber or something between the magnet and the core. Do you still hear the sound? Or simply, do you hear that sound in Episode 3 ? Still not convinced? Than look at Episode 2 - you can hear the sound since he touches the magnet with the toroid - not earlier. Now think, what effect does it cause on the output coil? Not the sound of course lol.
Just to note: I'm not saying the idea with 2SGen is wrong. In my opinion it is in fact capable to be OU. I'm only saying that it works differently that you want it to work. And also in my opinion no special super druper physics do apply here.
-
Another way:
We WANT B-flux NOT leaving core!
Is Episode 8 (simmulation) right way?
Is Episode 9 right way?
Are both?
When yes,...
....Where is E ~dA/d.... (x,y,z,t) biggest? In what direction?
How to grip it? How to do winding?
I dont have an idea, how curl-free A looks like, and how E made from dA/d... looks like.
So, I WANT close-loop B, I WANT curl-free A, I DONT want bemf anymore. ;)
Regards
magneto_DC
-
Nicolay E. Zaev determined that ¨direct conversion of environmental heat to electric power is possible in the process of charge discharge¨. After the toroid cools from the demagnetization, it converts environmental heat to electricity. This is called Work, and is the opposite of entropy. The toroid converts heat from around itself to do the work of generating electricity. The amount of work is a function of the material alloy. Some alloys can do more work than others. Zaev has them classed according to their Lambda ratio, input to output. Nanoperm is at the top end of the scale. The toroids that are not cooling are not domain flipping and are not generating any power from conversion of room heat. Temperature loss is directly proportional to output!
-
Hi Gyula,
Okay, battery is recharged, and found out that I had also blown all of my 4 large LED's.
Replaced them with a different LED.
Any who, with no load, I ran the following test:
SSG3 Ohms reading:
50.3 Ohms
No Load Voltage:
30.2 volts
50.4 resistor added in parallel
New ohms reading is 25.3 ohms for SSG3
No Load Voltage
1.8 volts
On a side note, I am lighting 4 led's in series, 25ma 3.6V (max) and also in series with them is one 28V 40ma bulb. LED's fully lit, a glow on the bulb, and 15 volts on volt meter.
If you can recalculate for me, what size cap to add and I will get it ordered. Thank you!
@ ALL
I did get a hold of the laser thermometer and it shows a definate drop in temperature... But only 3 degrees, when running.
I suspect (and cautioned) that the magnetic fields were effecting the electronic temp probe.
But, I still wonder...LOL
Any who, parts are in from digikey and it's time to play!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Evening ALL,
I ran two very intersting experiments this evening, using the exact circuit as posted by JLN Labs. Strange results, at least to me, but you can decide and comment. Tomorrow I will replace resistors with lesser values, and with lights after wards.
Self explanatory below. Pay special attention to resistor values and output.
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Why does this cooling effect bother you?
...
Your reply is the proof that you, not me, is bothered with cooling. You spoke the first, not me, about cooling in this thread.
For me there is no cooling so I'm not bothered!
If I detect one in the future, I will inform you. ;)
-
The oscilloscope trace is a straight line in Episode 7. How can we see this leakage flux in Episode 7? There are two circuits in Episode 7 and only 1 circuit in Episode 6, so you can't use the oscilloscope trace from Episode 6 for your analysis of Episode 7. This is how you're intentionally trying to twist the facts by mixing two different experiments of your analysis of a single experiment, and you continue to knowingly do this.
You continue to make references about measurements errors even after being warned several times. I don't think we have to worry about you're distractions here any longer.
GB
You are lying by blinding yourself. I'm not twisting the facts: you don't even understand them. Your interpretation of what we observe is biased. Every one can detect the leakage flux with a simple small coil connected to an oscilloscope and placed near the toroid coil. If you refuse the facts and are not able to check them yourself by experiments, at least don't insult or accuse others.
-
...
We WANT B-flux NOT leaving core!
...
We all want this. Unfortunately it is not possible.
The flux from the permanent magnet pass through each side of the 2Sgen toroid core. We have half the flux in each side.
But the circular flux from the pulsed coil, adds to the flux from the magnet in one side of the core, and subtracts in the other side. It saturates a side more than the other.
It follows that the permeability of the toroid is no more balanced. The extra flux in the side of higher permeability cannot loop through the side of lower permeability, thus it expands and loops around the toroid.
It is easily detected with a small probe coil.
-
You are lying by blinding yourself. I'm not twisting the facts: you don't even understand them. Your interpretation of what we observe is biased. Every one can detect the leakage flux with a simple small coil connected to an oscilloscope and placed near the toroid coil. If you refuse the facts and are not able to check them yourself by experiments, at least don't insult or accuse others.
Look at the full FEMM simulation in Naudin's experiment. You will observe the magnetic field outside the toroidal coil is null, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Uo0s7boCPc
I think your interpretation of what we observe is biased.
GB
-
But the circular flux from the pulsed coil, adds to the flux from the magnet in one side of the core, and subtracts in the other side. It saturates a side more than the other.
Exactly, and this means we are using only half of the core, and getting only half power out. Half of the toroid is always saturated, which is a waste of material.
Ideally we would want all the PM flux to remain inside the core during current ON time and all the flux to leave the core during OFF time. This will produce max change in the flux (dB/dt), which means max induced power.
Edit: Working on some solution...
-
Exactly, and this means we are using only half of the core, and getting only half power out. Half of the toroid is always saturated, which is a waste of material.
Ideally we would want all the PM flux to remain inside the core during current ON time and all the flux to leave the core during OFF time. This will produce max change in the flux (dB/dt), which means max induced power.
Edit: Working on some solution...
Why would the flux leaving the core during the coil on time be such a problem?
If the magnet alone has already pushed both sides of the core to near saturation, then only a very small amount of power will cause all the flux from the magnet to over saturate one side of the core, pushing some flux outside the core.
Even if there could be any BEMF, it would not directly be related to the supplied coil current.
In fact, if half the flux in the core was from the magnet and half from the coil, you would only get half the expected BEMF in the coil max.
During the coil collapse, the field will induce an opposite current through the coil winding and again over saturate the other side of the core as the field sloshes back and forth through the core like water in a "U" shaped tube.
-
Hi Gyula,
Okay, battery is recharged, and found out that I had also blown all of my 4 large LED's.
Replaced them with a different LED.
Any who, with no load, I ran the following test:
SSG3 Ohms reading:
50.3 Ohms
No Load Voltage:
30.2 volts
50.4 resistor added in parallel
New ohms reading is 25.3 ohms for SSG3
No Load Voltage
1.8 volts
Hi Bruce,
With your above data, and still using 500Hz output frequency, the needed series capacitance is 379 nF (rounded value). The best would be to use a capacitance box but with the combinations of some standard values like 33 100 150 220 nF caps you can approach it. (for instance you parallel a 150 nF with two 100 nF and a 33nF you get 383 nF already. If you could change the 500 Hz frequency a little, you could also nicely trim this series RLC circuit to its resonant frequency. So remember: the 379 nF capacitor should be in SERIES with your coils output, then comes the 50.4 Ohm resistor load.
On a side note, I am lighting 4 led's in series, 25ma 3.6V (max) and also in series with them is one 28V 40ma bulb. LED's fully lit, a glow on the bulb, and 15 volts on volt meter.
If you have an oscilloscope, it would be good to see the output waveform, without the series 379 nF capacitor. Because keep in mind: the LEDs perform a half wave rectification this means two things: they give light only whenever the AC output is higher than their forward voltage (4*3.6V=14.4V) and the bulb also lights only whenever the LEDs can conduct in their forward biased state. SO there is no any load across your output for every second half wave time length, and in the other half wave times when LEDS could already conduct there is still no load current till the AC output exceeds 14.4V peak voltage, to defeat their series forward voltage drop.
This may show how decisive can it be to use LEDs as a load if you are not considering their diode behavior and their open voltage characteristics.
If you omit the LEDs and use only ,say, the 28V, 40mA bulb it changes the loading effect considerable because current will be able to flow in any moment of the AC waveform (except zero crossings, if there is such in the waveform). Needless to say, the true output power also changes drastically vs the LED+bulb loading case.
rgds, Gyula
PS: if you already have received the L meter, I would like to learn what you measured at (the unpowered) coils output. Also I am curious to know the L value of one separate Brook coil of yours.
-
We all want this. Unfortunately it is not possible.
The flux from the permanent magnet pass through each side of the 2Sgen toroid core. We have half the flux in each side.
But the circular flux from the pulsed coil, adds to the flux from the magnet in one side of the core, and subtracts in the other side. It saturates a side more than the other.
It follows that the permeability of the toroid is no more balanced. The extra flux in the side of higher permeability cannot loop through the side of lower permeability, thus it expands and loops around the toroid.
It is easily detected with a small probe coil.
Why would you not want the flux leaving the core?
The only thing that makes this work is the flux leaving the core. If the flux was contained totally within the core, how will any current be induced in the pickup coil?
-
Hi Bruce,
With your above data, and still using 500Hz output frequency, the needed series capacitance is 379 nF (rounded value). The best would be to use a capacitance box but with the combinations of some standard values like 33 100 150 220 nF caps you can approach it. (for instance you parallel a 150 nF with two 100 nF and a 33nF you get 383 nF already. If you could change the 500 Hz frequency a little, you could also nicely trim this series RLC circuit to its resonant frequency. So remember: the 379 nF capacitor should be in SERIES with your coils output, then comes the 50.4 Ohm resistor load.
If you have an oscilloscope, it would be good to see the output waveform, without the series 379 nF capacitor. Because keep in mind: the LEDs perform a half wave rectification this means two things: they give light only whenever the AC output is higher than their forward voltage (4*3.6V=14.4V) and the bulb also lights only whenever the LEDs can conduct in their forward biased state. SO there is no any load across your output for every second half wave time length, and in the other half wave times when LEDS could already conduct there is still no load current till the AC output exceeds 14.4V peak voltage, to defeat their series forward voltage drop.
This may show how decisive can it be to use LEDs as a load if you are not considering their diode behavior and their open voltage characteristics.
If you omit the LEDs and use only ,say, the 28V, 40mA bulb it changes the loading effect considerable because current will be able to flow in any moment of the AC waveform (except zero crossings, if there is such in the waveform). Needless to say, the true output power also changes drastically vs the LED+bulb loading case.
rgds, Gyula
PS: if you already have received the L meter, I would like to learn what you measured at (the unpowered) coils output. Also I am curious to know the L value of one separate Brook coil of yours.
Hi Gyula,
Thank you once again. I will try the aforementioned caps in series with the resistor, as I will order them this evening and redo that experiment.
The L Meter has not yet arrived, but I will let you know, as soon as it does.
I also want to double check the frequency of the output.
@ ALL,
I did a little experimenting this morning. I unhooked the bias that is wired in series around each of my brooks coils, and tried running the SSG3. Input power went way up, and Output power went way down.
This simple experiment, gave me a GREAT idea, to capture more of the curled A and B of the large toroid leaning against the large magnet.
I said earlier that a B field could act as an entrainment (forcefield) and contain the flux.
I am going to wrap a bias around a tube, trying both air core and steel core, and use that as my B field bias on that toroid and magnet. IF that works in increasing output, and I am almost sure that it will, I will add two more additional bias' as b fields to the same toroid. Hard to describe, I will draw it up later. A picture is worth a thousand words...LOL
So..tonight, I will work some on my new circuit that will drop my input power, and also work on my newest bias winding.
I am VERY excited about this idea, because I think it will work and would increase output dramatically and decrease input... ;) There is only one way to know and that is to do it!
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
Your reply is the proof that you, not me, is bothered with cooling. You spoke the first, not me, about cooling in this thread.
For me there is no cooling so I'm not bothered!
If I detect one in the future, I will inform you. ;)
End of Quote!
New addition:
Here's a partial quote from the introduction to Zaev's (Capacitance converter of environmental heat to electric power) publication. ¨Such converters of energy create COLD and electric power without any fuel¨.
-
I just emailed Jean Louis Naudin and asked him if he would be kind enough to make some caloric measurements on his 2SGen Toroid for our SSOrbo experimenters group here at Overunity. This is a critical standard.
-
Why would the flux leaving the core during the coil on time be such a problem?
Let me clear it. Flux should leave the core at on time, it is not a problem.
Now how much flux should couple with the pickup and how much should remain ? This is the question. Ideally, one would want all of the flux to leave the core and couple with the pickup windings, not only half of it, to induce max power.
I'm sorry, I could not come up with any clever ideas on this today (except the one for placing the core such that the hole faces the PM instead of edge on).
Perhaps the best designs are those posted very early in the bigger steorn thread.
-
Your reply is the proof that you, not me, is bothered with cooling. You spoke the first, not me, about cooling in this thread.
For me there is no cooling so I'm not bothered!
If I detect one in the future, I will inform you. ;)
Bruce spoke first about the cooling effect in this thread, not me. Why would I be bothered with the cooling, when I think it's a good effect? You on the other hand believe there is no cooling, so you are bothered with these reports because it is in disagreement with what you believe and it would be an indicator of excess energy in this setup, which you are also against.
GB
-
It doesn't matter if the flux leaves the core or doesn't leave the core at on time, because the pickup coil is open circuit during the on-time of the pulse, thus if there is flux leakage due to saturation during the on-time, it's not inducing an EMF in the pickup coil.
GB
-
I wonder what the results would be with partially demagnetized magnets. Steorn's patented measuring device mentions the testing of partially demagnetized magnets.
GB
-
Good evening ALL,
I found what I hope will be the perfect form for my first bias experiment. It is plastic. Later I will try the metal.
Now it is time to wind it, with three layers.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Let me clear it. Flux should leave the core at on time, it is not a problem.
Now how much flux should couple with the pickup and how much should remain ? This is the question. Ideally, one would want all of the flux to leave the core and couple with the pickup windings, not only half of it, to induce max power.
I'm sorry, I could not come up with any clever ideas on this today (except the one for placing the core such that the hole faces the PM instead of edge on).
Perhaps the best designs are those posted very early in the bigger steorn thread.
I'm not sure you are only getting half the flux. It appears that all the flux from the magnet is pushed to half the core. So in the end you get all the flux, just out one side of the core.
I think the magnet itself needs to put the core very close to saturation along both sides. Then when the coil is energized, the flux is pushed to one side which by itself is more than one side can handle, so flux leaves the core at very little expense to energize the pickup coil. Any BEMF would have little effect on the coil drive current because the coil only sees the core material and excludes outside fields.
-
Evening ALL,
I have wound myself silly, and the three layer, 1.2 ohm bias winding is completed.
I am going to experiment with it tomorrow evening and we will see what we see... ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
EDIT:
Bottom drawing is the next logical conclusion to my idea, if it works.
-
Episode 10: Influence of the magnet on the hysteresis curve of ferromagnetic core (with and without the magnet), http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#hysteresis
Bruce, I like your flux diode idea.
GB
-
Look at the full FEMM simulation in Naudin's experiment. You will observe the magnetic field outside the toroidal coil is null, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Uo0s7boCPc
I think your interpretation of what we observe is biased.
GB
FEMM is not real life. Not only real life is in 3D, FEMM in 2D, but also FEMM doesn't handle properly saturation without severe precautions (see their FAQ section 3).
Leave your PC and check yourself by making experiments instead of blind belief in 2D simulations! Flux leakages are obvious.
-
Why would the flux leaving the core during the coil on time be such a problem?
It is not the problem, it is the solution: the "leakage" flux is the useful flux that the pickup coil recovers.
If the magnet alone has already pushed both sides of the core to near saturation, then only a very small amount of power will cause all the flux from the magnet to over saturate one side of the core, pushing some flux outside the core.
I don't believe you have measured the energy for saturating the core. It is not small, it is big and always less than the energy recoverable by the pickup coil.
Even if there could be any BEMF, it would not directly be related to the supplied coil current.
Proof?
In fact, if half the flux in the core was from the magnet and half from the coil, you would only get half the expected BEMF in the coil max.
During the coil collapse, the field will induce an opposite current through the coil winding and again over saturate the other side of the core as the field sloshes back and forth through the core like water in a "U" shaped tube.
By creating an opposing flux, the field collapse tends to saturate the core, opposing the desaturation. It is the reason why BEMF is not strong: the desaturation increases mu thus moderates the field collapse. The collapse is extended in time. There is an exchange between the internal energy of saturation which is released, and the energy in the field which is partially refilled.
We must remember that it is only the change of flux that induces current in the pickup coil. The change of flux is due only to the coil field, not to the constant permanent magnet field. The magnet field is just the way for unbalancing the saturation along the toroid core. It doesn't provide energy (Naudin is right on this point).
-
It doesn't matter if the flux leaves the core or doesn't leave the core at on time, because the pickup coil is open circuit during the on-time of the pulse, thus if there is flux leakage due to saturation during the on-time, it's not inducing an EMF in the pickup coil.
GB
False statement. A change of flux through a coil always induce Emf. Emf is an electric field acting as a force onto the electrons. When the circuit is open, there is no current but still a potential difference, a voltage. You are confusing voltage and current.
-
Why would you not want the flux leaving the core?
The only thing that makes this work is the flux leaving the core. If the flux was contained totally within the core, how will any current be induced in the pickup coil?
The flux in question was only the flux from the coil.
We would not want this flux leaving the core if we wanted that the 2Sgen works as the dreamers imagine it.
The dreamers dreamed about a ferrite core acting as a variable filter between a permanent magnet and a pickup coil. And the dreamers dreamed that the coil flux remains confined to the core, just for modulating the permeability and consequently the permanent magnet flux, at almost no cost. It is the reason why the coil flux should not escape.
I verified by experiments what the dreamers among whom I was dreamed, and obviously it was a dream. The field theory still applies. Even in non linear materials, the fields superpose. A flux is not a current that we could switch on and off by such a way, it is conservative.
-
It is not the problem, it is the solution: the "leakage" flux is the useful flux that the pickup coil recovers.
Ok we all (almost) agree.
I don't believe you have measured the energy for saturating the core. It is not small, it is big and always less than the energy recoverable by the pickup coil.
It shouldn't be if you set the MH operating point as Naudin says:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/2SGenworkingzone.gif
Proof?
BEMF would not directly be related to the supplied coil current as it's magnet's flux that does leak.
We must remember that it is only the change of flux that induces current in the pickup coil. The change of flux is due only to the coil field, not to the constant permanent magnet field. The magnet field is just the way for unbalancing the saturation along the toroid core. It doesn't provide energy (Naudin is right on this point).
IMHO that's not right. The toroid coil's flux remains inside the toroid core. The flux leakage is due to the coil's field, but it's the magnet's flux that does leak. And yes the magnet's field is the way for unbalancing the saturation along the toroid core but it's also does provide the energy.
-
Hi Gyula,
It is back at 70 Hz for sure. This of course drops as the rotor switching drops. This would change the values of the cap, correct?
Thanks!
Bruce
-
False statement. A change of flux through a coil always induce Emf. Emf is an electric field acting as a force onto the electrons. When the circuit is open, there is no current but still a potential difference, a voltage. You are confusing voltage and current.
False statement, when measuring between two points you are closing the loop (creating a return path), thus you will see a voltage. The charges may be separated, but they're not moving (static electric field). It takes a moving charge to induce a magnetic field. There is no voltage/current through the pickup coil during the on-time because the pickup coil is open (there is no potential difference due to no return path, thus there is no voltage.....there is no potential difference because there are no connections between the two ends). This means the flux leakage isn't providing the power to the pickup coil. The pickup coil is closed during the off-time, thus it is the collapsing field that is inducing a voltage/current in the pickup coil.
You are trying to twist my words and taking things out of context. Please tell me how having no potential difference or connection point between the two ends of the pickup coil due to a leakage flux of the toroid during the on-time is going to power the pickup coil when it is open.
GB
-
Bruce
Remember the gaps?
Well you gota see this
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8852.msg232123#msg232123
http://www.youtube.com/user/LaFonteGroup#p/u/4/VP5kQc29E54
Simply sick.
Mags
-
Leave your PC and check yourself by making experiments instead of blind belief in 2D simulations! Flux leakages are obvious.
Please tell me how your experiment with the vibrating magnets prove there is substantial flux leakage due to saturation in a toroid and how your flux leakage is inducing a voltage/current in the pickup coil when the pickup coil is open with no return path during the on-time.
The collapsing field between the off-time/on-time could vibrate the magnet. The magnet being attracted/not attracted to the core during the off-time/on-time could also vibrate the magnet. Another possibility for the magnets vibrating is because the flux isn't fully engaged inside the core during the rise time of the current (this is what you see as being the leakage flux in your experiment, but it has nothing to do with saturation). When the current is not rising, then there is no leakage flux because the flux is fully engaged inside the ferromagnetic materials (assuming it's not over-saturated). Your experiment proves nothing.
Your probe coil experiment proves nothing either, because the probe coil is closed during the entire experiment. Please do the experiment with the probe coil open during the on-time of the pulse and then closed during the off-time of the pulse and you will see it's the collapsing field in Naudin's experiment that is inducing a voltage/current in the pickup coil in his experiment and not your flux leakage during the on-time.
Here's one of my experiments showing there is no leakage flux from the magnets when opposite poles are attached to a ferromagnetic material, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_81SxByRNR8
GB
-
Bruce
Remember the gaps?
Well you gota see this
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8852.msg232123#msg232123
http://www.youtube.com/user/LaFonteGroup#p/u/4/VP5kQc29E54
Simply sick.
Mags
I.... ah...well, it looks like a very nice configuration of a standard alternator?
-
Lumen
As I am thinking more about it, you may be right. I was just thinking a bit before you posted, if the stators, instead of just 2, were like. 8 or 16, then we would have what you are saying. But as shown, it is convincing as to how things would even out. But in this case of just 2, there may be something to it.
I suppose we will have to wait and see what it is all about in reality.
Oh well
Back to winding coils and changing capacitors. =]
mags
-
Jean Louis Naudin responded to my email request for caloric measurements. Here's what he had to say:
¨Some calorimetric measurement on the 2SGen have already been done; In spite of the high power flow in the coil with the 2SGen V6, it doesn't heat up and it doesn't cool down due to the joule heating, but it doesn't heat up in comparison to the current flow. I think the cooling effect compensates for the joule heat, and this explains why the core remains at ambient temperature. I need to conduct more tests in this area, and will publish the results in a soon to be released 2SGen video¨.
Thanks very much to Jean Louis for his prompt reply and eagerness to help us here at the SSOrbo thread.
-
Hi Gyula,
It is back at 70 Hz for sure. This of course drops as the rotor switching drops. This would change the values of the cap, correct?
Thanks!
Bruce
Hi Bruce,
Ok, here it is for 70 Hz, with your other data:
SSG3 Ohms reading:
50.3 Ohms
No Load Voltage:
30.2 volts
50.4 resistor added in parallel
New ohms reading is 25.3 ohms for SSG3
No Load Voltage
1.8 volts
Now the needed capacitor is much higher, 500/70=7.142 times higher, so it is 2.7 uF (rounded). (The resultant inductance for the 6 Brook coils with some cores and with their mutual coupling inductance comes out now as 1.91 Henry.)
You can use two 1uF or one 2uF (non-electrolytic) capacitor and connect the following values of 470nF and 220nF in parallel with it, so that makes about 2.7uF and this cap combination comes in series with one of your coil outputs, then comes the load resistor 50.4 Ohm to the other end of the cap combination and the load other end goes to the other coil output, to complete the circuit.
rgds, Gyula
-
Hi Bruce,
Ok, here it is for 70 Hz, with your other data:
SSG3 Ohms reading:
50.3 Ohms
No Load Voltage:
30.2 volts
50.4 resistor added in parallel
New ohms reading is 25.3 ohms for SSG3
No Load Voltage
1.8 volts
Now the needed capacitor is much higher, 500/70=7.142 times higher, so it is 2.7 uF (rounded). (The resultant inductance for the 6 Brook coils with some cores and with their mutual coupling inductance comes out now as 1.91 Henry.)
You can use two 1uF or one 2uF (non-electrolytic) capacitor and connect the following values of 470nF and 220nF in parallel with it, so that makes about 2.7uF and this cap combination comes in series with one of your coil outputs, then comes the load resistor 50.4 Ohm to the other end of the cap combination and the load other end goes to the other coil output, to complete the circuit.
rgds, Gyula
Outstanding! Thank you.
-
Flux lines can't cross each other. During the on-time, the flux will be disconnecting and reconnecting because they can't cross each other, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB4OhePboY4 (watch how the flux reconnects and disconnects in this video in real time. You can also see this in Naudin's FEMM simulation). The magnets keep the flux from swinging outside the core in order to fully engage the core material, so they must disconnect and reconnect in order to fully engage the core.
This disconnecting and reconnecting of the flux produces excess heat. This disconnecting and reconnecting of the flux perturbs the uncurled A-Potental outside of the core and the core receives EM pulses from space-time outside of the localized region which produces excess heat.
This excess heat cause the core to demagnetize much quicker during the off-time. The flux will also disconnect and reconnect during the off-time during the collapse of the field in order to disengage from the core, allowing it to perturb the uncurled A-Potential again, which sends EM pulses back to the coil providing excess energy. This also reduces the hysteresis losses.
Watch all of SirSerp's videos, http://www.youtube.com/user/SirZerp , there is a lot to learn from them. This is no simulation and is a novel technique for the visualization of magnetic fields in real time.
Here's another video from another user showing the interactions of the magnetic fields in real time, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byxCYvDjFRM
Notice how the flux lines never cross each other in both videos.
GB
-
I'm having some difficulty getting a hold of some cores from Metglas. I've spoken to their US sales rep, sent an email with details for the cores I'm after, still no reply. I'll call him again tomorrow.
He had mentioned Elna Magnetics as a redistributor for Metglas - I called and spoke with EM's sales rep, who told me that they do not have ANY Finemet available, and that getting ahold of some is quite problematic, he went as far as to say I'd have to fax in paperwork stating I wouldnt use the cores for WMDs?? For the Metglas I was requesting, he said that he'd have a shipment toward the end of May, and that other orders would typically require a lead time of 36 weeks??
Is this what others have gone through? How did JLN get a hold of his nanocrystalline cores?
I dont suppose any has spares they'd be willing to sell ???
-
I'm having some difficulty getting a hold of some cores from Metglas. I've spoken to their US sales rep, sent an email with details for the cores I'm after, still no reply. I'll call him again tomorrow.
He had mentioned Elna Magnetics as a redistributor for Metglas - I called and spoke with EM's sales rep, who told me that they do not have ANY Finemet available, and that getting ahold of some is quite problematic, he went as far as to say I'd have to fax in paperwork stating I wouldnt use the cores for WMDs?? For the Metglas I was requesting, he said that he'd have a shipment toward the end of May, and that other orders would typically require a lead time of 36 weeks??
Is this what others have gone through? How did JLN get a hold of his nanocrystalline cores?
I dont suppose any has spares they'd be willing to sell ???
Here's an on-line inquiry form for ordering the finemet cores from Hitachi Metals, http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/cntct/indx_cntct2.html
Metglas is Hitachi Metals sister company. The on-line form asks, If final application is related to w.,m,.d or Military Use. This should raise a red flag for suppression of science and technology along with a lead time of 36 weeks for other orders. It's just a toroid core, right? LOL
The bottom line is they don't want the general public to be testing these high performance cores. The governments and big corporations are buying up all the supplies. I even have a video of a contractor saying he has a hard time sometimes finding supplies because the government is buying everything up.
GB
-
Good Evening ALL,
Well, after experimenting all night with my air core bias, I must say no joy. I did see signs of potential life, enough to warrant me taking the added time and effort to wind another identical bias on a metal form. I believe that I need a much stronger B field to contain the toroidal and magnet flux, to "squeeze" it out the ends. So, I will basically make a hollow electromagnet. Plenty of B field and see what I see. ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Please tell me how your experiment with the vibrating magnets prove there is substantial flux leakage
...
Are you saying that a magnet can vibrate without a varying magnetic field?
-
Are you saying that a magnet can vibrate without a varying magnetic field?
also without external flux vector potential is not zero ... ???
http://jnaudin.free.fr/vpexp/index.htm
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0143-0807/2/3/008
-
Are you saying that a magnet can vibrate without a varying magnetic field?
I'm an electrodynamics noob, but if a permanent magnet is in the vicinity of a core with an oscillating attractiveness (with the whole orbo thing, as the toroid is pulsed its attractiveness is diminished), the permanent magnets attraction will also oscillate causing it to vibrate - this is without the need for flux leakage from the core at all right?
-
I'm an electrodynamics , but if a permanent is in the vicinity of a core with an oscillating attractiveness (with the whole orbo thing, as the toroid is pulsed its attractiveness is diminished), the permanent magnets attraction will also oscillate causing it to vibrate - this is without the need for flux leakage from the core at all right?
Yes, that's correct as Lumen pointed out. In addition to this, the flux isn't fully engaged while building the field because the flux lines can't cross each other, and to do otherwise would violate Ampere’s
Circuital Law. So, any newly created flux in building the field must swing outside the core in order to fully engage the core material. Loops can not overlap or cross either so they must expand or contract inside the core.
Below is an image showing how the flux lines engage the core. Don't pay any attention to the secondary in the image, the results will be the same in our example without the secondary since we're pulsing the coil. Here's a very informative article that explains flux threading in great detail, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=377
This method preserves the integrity of the classical flux model and Ampere’s Circuital Law. It's the only way that a magnetic field can expand (or contract) and to fully engage the core material without violating Ampere’s Circuital Law.
When magnets are attached within the toroid core, then the flux lines have no other choice but to disconnect and to reconnect in order to fully engage the core and to expand and contract inside the core in order to form closed loops. It requires energy for the flux lines to disconnect/reconnect and it pulls this energy from the vacuum by perturbing the uncurled A-Potential outside the core. This isn't any super duper physics. It's a very simple concept that is known in physics. The end result is receiving excess energy from the vacuum.
GB
-
I'm having some difficulty getting a hold of some cores from Metglas. I've spoken to their US sales rep, sent an email with details for the cores I'm after, still no reply. I'll call him again tomorrow.
He had mentioned Elna Magnetics as a redistributor for Metglas - I called and spoke with EM's sales rep, who told me that they do not have ANY Finemet available, and that getting ahold of some is quite problematic, he went as far as to say I'd have to fax in paperwork stating I wouldnt use the cores for WMDs?? For the Metglas I was requesting, he said that he'd have a shipment toward the end of May, and that other orders would typically require a lead time of 36 weeks??
Is this what others have gone through? How did JLN get a hold of his nanocrystalline cores?
I dont suppose any has spares they'd be willing to sell ???
Try this site for Metglas film. You should be able to roll your own toroids from this material. Scroll down to Metglas. Ultra high permeability space age cobalt alloy (1,000,000+). 1 inch wide $2.50 per linear foot.
http://www.lessemf.com/mag-shld.html (http://www.lessemf.com/mag-shld.html)
Also the Nanoperm core JLN uses from PCIM Europe:http://www.magnetec.de/pdf/pcim%202000.pdf (http://www.magnetec.de/pdf/pcim%202000.pdf)
-
Also the Nanoperm core JLN uses from PCIM Europe:http://www.magnetec.de/pdf/pcim%202000.pdf (http://www.magnetec.de/pdf/pcim%202000.pdf)
Good point! I'm ordering a core from them - which is great! The only downside is, the ~2.5 inch core I'm ordering is fifty bucks and shipping to the US is fifty bucks lol
Ah well, in the name of research :) Thats really super - I was getting depressed about the metglas/hitachi situation, I have my oscilloscope, function generators, inductance meter, 2"x0.5" neo disc magnets, spool of 26# wire, etc, ready - and then I couldn't get a core - so thanks for pointing that out! (excited, a bit).
Once I get the last puzzle piece in I'll be sure to contribute to the video saga.
-
@void
Have you seen this link? Maybe they also sell within USA?
http://www.mhw-intl.com/products/nanocrystalline.htm
rgds, Gyula
-
While I endure the epic wait for my core to cross the pond and get to my doorstep, I'll get my circuit ready for its arrival.
I'm thinking of setting up a parallel resonant circuit to drive the coil - wouldn't that pretty much nullify most of the power requirements for pulsing the core?
-
@void
Have you seen this link? Maybe they also sell within USA?
http://www.mhw-intl.com/products/nanocrystalline.htm
rgds, Gyula
Nope, had not seen that site. I used to think myself a google guru, but I went through pages of google results and couldnt turn up distributors, I appreciate the links to these sites. :)
-
While I endure the epic wait for my core to cross the pond and get to my doorstep, I'll get my circuit ready for its arrival.
I'm thinking of setting up a parallel resonant circuit to drive the coil - wouldn't that pretty much nullify most of the power requirements for pulsing the core?
Parallel resonant tank circuit. That is what I was going to try as soon as I finished my current CNC lathe project.
Wind the coil with two passes of heavy gauge wire, one pass advancing around the core clockwise and the second layer advancing counter clockwise, with the same number of turns in each pass. This should eliminate any projected flux in the parallel plane.
Then, check the inductance with the magnets in place, and calculate the required capacitor for a good frequency somewhere in the range of your frequency generator.
Connect the frequency generator coupled with a small value signal feed capacitor, and tune it on the scope watching for the expanding peaks as it becomes resonate.
Once resonate, lower it into a section of copper pipe and see if the externally shorted flux has any influence on the resonate frequency and how far it would need to be re-tuned to again become resonate. Check the new resonate frequency and compare it to the original.
Rotate the coil within the copper tube and find the position of greatest change and least change to evaluate the overall emission field direction and relationship to the input power.
In a resonate state, you should not need to recover any of the coils EMF, since it is already used to enforce the resonate state.
Well, at least that's the way I would do it. It's all for fun!
-
Hi Groundloop :)
I started a topic for the self running coil I was telling you about.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892
Luc
-
also without external flux vector potential is not zero ... ???
http://jnaudin.free.fr/vpexp/index.htm
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0143-0807/2/3/008
There is a vector potential around a toroid. The Aharonov–Bohm effect is a very weak effect that is related to it.
Nevertheless it doesn't cause any force on an permanent magnet!
Or please give us references about macroscopic effects of the vector potential without B/E fields.
-
There is a vector potential around a toroid. The Aharonov–Bohm effect is a very weak effect that is related to it.
Nevertheless it doesn't cause any force on an permanent magnet!
Or please give us references about macroscopic effects of the vector potential without B/E fields.
That's about the same as saying, show me the effects of gravity without mass, lol (we can't show you the effects of acceleration from gravity without having a large mass to cause a curvature in space-time). You're statement above makes it clear you don't understand potentials and fields. The E and B fields can be derived from the potential A, but the potential can not be derived from the E and B fields.
The Aharonov–Bohm effect shows that the local E and B fields do not contain full information about the electromagnetic field, and the electromagnetic four-potential, A, must be used instead.
By Stokes' theorem, the magnitude of the Aharonov–Bohm effect can be calculated using A alone or using E and B alone. But when using E and B, however, the effect depends on the field values in a region from which the test particle is excluded, not only classically but also quantum mechanically.
In contrast, the effect depends on A only in the region where the test particle is allowed. Therefore we can either abandon the principle of locality (which most physicists are reluctant to do) or we are forced to accept the realization that the electromagnetic potential offers a more complete description of electromagnetism than the electric and magnetic fields can.
In classical electromagnetism the two descriptions were equivalent. With the addition of quantum theory, though, the electromagnetic potential A is seen as being more fundamental or "real"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aharonov-Bohm_effect
GB
-
Hello ALL,
I tried out one of Luc's ideas by placing air gaps at most of the areas that I had magnets touch coils or toroids and you know what..... My input power dropped by 1 watt. It is now running steady at .170 A @ 12 V. Also at the same time, my output amperage rose by a third.
Tonight I am building a new input circuit that should give me an input of 1.5 V @ .170 A for a total INPUT wattage of 0.255 watts.
Please remember that I have yet to use electronic switching...LOL I am saving that for last, and it will hopefully put me into OU land. But for now, I continue day after day to optimize as I use a rotor to switch between 50 and 70 Hz. ;D
Cheers,
Bruce
http://www.EnergyFreedomReport.com
-
That's about the same as saying, show me the effects of gravity without mass, lol (we can't show you the effects of acceleration from gravity without having a large mass to cause a curvature in space-time).
The question was: "please give us references about macroscopic effects of the potential vector without B/E fields".
The question was asked because you pretend the force onto the magnet is due to the potential vector instead of a magnetic field!
You have all what you need to reply. You have a pulsed coil and a permanent magnet which a force is acting on. There are objects and facts.
If you cannot relate the force on the magnet to the potential vector in the particular case or Orbo system, then it is useless to repeat courses banalities about the "potential vector" like a parrot. I know them, I already took these courses at the university.
No need of erroneous fantaisies and fabrications: the obvious explanation is that there is a magnetic field acting on the permanent magnet.
-
No need of erroneous fantaisies and fabrications: the obvious explanation is that there is a magnetic field acting on the permanent magnet.
I'm confused, I thought the leading conjecture that most in this and the other orbo thread agree on, is that pulsing the cores modifies the attractiveness that the permanent magnet experiences toward it. A phrase I've seen thrown around alot is that "the toroid becomes invisible to the magnet". While it seems that isnt the case, invisible, it seems obvious that the attraction is lessened.
If the attractiveness the magnet experiences toward the toroid is oscillating - it seems obvious that it would vibrate (however slightly). It seems that you are disagreeing with this hypothesis that's been thrown around for months. In this case, I suppose you could said the toroids magnetic field was acting on the magnet, but in a completely indirect manner, right?
I'm always reticent about posting, since I'm still learning much.
-
I have two questions I hope someone can help me answer.
I've been reading about toroid coils, and designing them to meeting particular needs. I have equations I can use so that I can create enough flux to approach or meet the saturation point of my toroid (I believe mine is 500mT). Ok maybe two questions:
1) It IS the case that I want to meet, but not exceed the saturation point right? As this would be wasted flux since the return would taper off dramatically.
2) As far as the toroid design, with what is being done with these projects (orbo-type), we really want as many windings as possible, because more windings would result in more inductance, thus requiring less current to reach saturation. Is that correct?
I have some 2" and 2.5" cores I want to wind, I just want to make sure I have the right idea before I do, looks like it will take a considerable amount of winding :D
-
The question was: "please give us references about macroscopic effects of the potential vector without B/E fields".
The question was asked because you pretend the force onto the magnet is due to the potential vector instead of a magnetic field!
You have all what you need to reply. You have a pulsed coil and a permanent magnet which a force is acting on. There are objects and facts.
If you cannot relate the force on the magnet to the potential vector in the particular case or Orbo system, then it is useless to repeat courses banalities about the "potential vector" like a parrot. I know them, I already took these courses at the university.
No need of erroneous fantaisies and fabrications: the obvious explanation is that there is a magnetic field acting on the permanent magnet.
I have said the magnets were vibrating either due to them being attracted/non-attracted to the core from pulsing the coil as Lumen and Void has been saying also, or due to the flux not being fully engaged inside the core during the time the field is being built, and I provided references to the flux threading models.
My point is, you can't say the magnets are vibrating in your experiment due to a leakage flux from the toroid being saturated until you rule out the other possibilities. You have also agreed the toroid has a vector potential, so you must rule this out also as wings and I have mentioned. Once you rule out these other possibilities, then let me know. Until then, the magnets vibrating in your experiment doesn't prove it's from the leakage flux from the toroid being saturated.
Likewise, your probe coil experiment doesn't prove there is substantial flux leakage from saturation until you can prove it's not due to the flux only being partially engaged inside the toroid while the field is being built or from over-saturating the toroid. I am through with having a discussion with you. It's very obvious you and I, along with others here, are not going to change their opinions about your experiment, so there is no reason in continuing this discussion. To do otherwise would be insanity (it's already beyond insanity, lol, and I don't want to continue it or be a part of it anymore).
GB
-
Well if you put another non magnetized item near the core while its pulsing, the item would vibrate if the core is leaking what the tcoil is producing.
Vibrating a magnet near the pulsed tcore will happen whether the tcoil flux is leaking or not, due to the tcore pulse changes affecting the near field of the magnet that engages with the tcore.
mags
-
Well if you put another non magnetized item near the core while its pulsing, the item would vibrate if the core is leaking what the tcoil is producing.
Vibrating a magnet near the pulsed tcore will happen whether the tcoil flux is leaking or not, due to the tcore pulse changes affecting the near field of the magnet that engages with the tcore.
mags
Indeed! That's the simplest way to evaluate that claim, isn't it? ;D
-
Hello ALL,
Just a couple of quick updates. I built my new circuit to run the SSG3 on 1.5 volts, but it is not enough voltage. I then bumped the input voltage to 3 .2 volts and the output was a bit better. I am thinking that it may need 4.5 to 6 volts to operate at peak. My circuit resistance is a bit high, unfortunately, with toroids and biases.
Still about 1/2 of what I was putting into it, wattage wise.
I will let you all know how it goes.
I have come up with an interstingly simple idea that I am going to test. There is certainly something interesting to be said for using air gaps to switch or control flux from a magnet. So I said to myself, all night, how can we use this information to create a way to make and break an air gap electronically to act as a switch for our flux from the magnet that would cause it to flow in and out of our pick up coil. And then about 30 minutes ago, I hit upon this seemingly very simple idea. I wonder if it will work!
@ Gyula
I added 4.4 uF worth of Caps in series with my load, a small 28 v 40 ma bayonet bulb. It certainly helped, and increased my over all amperage output reading. (Back when I was running on 12 v)
I am still waiting for my L Meter. I can't wait to get it in, and we can start doing some things with resonance, etc.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
I am still waiting for my L Meter. I can't wait to get it in, and we can start doing some things with resonance, etc.
There is a 555 circuit which should give inductance measurements from a standard DMM. From the Yahoogroup Electonics_101. Do you
want it dug up?
-
Hi Paul-R,
Thank you, but I will wait. It should be here very soon. I will be on vacation Mon-Thurs and it should be here on my return.
Happy Sunday ALL,
Well, a little more good news this afternoon, has encouraged me greatly. It seems that my old circuit works on both two D-Cells or three D-Cells. My new circuit sucked down the amps with very little to show for it.
I now have three choices for input, when testing the electronic make and break when that time comes. Below are the following Stats: (all current measurements taken with an analog multimeter)
Input choice 1:
12 volts
.170 ma
2.04 watts
Input choice 2:
4.5 volts
.030 amps
0.135 watts
Drops SSG3 output by only 4 times, but is 15 times less input.
Input choice 3: ;D
3.2 volts
.010 amps
0.032 watts
Amperage out actually nearly doubles but volts out drops to .61 -- Drops total output by 1/2 but has 64 times less input... ;D
Next, I will do several things. Play with resonance, and replace D-Cells with rechargable D-Cells. Then I will build a recharging battery circuit to go with the set up. It is experimental and was drawn up for me by Alex. I have already ordered all of the parts and they have already arrived... ;) I was waiting to drop the input first, and I feel I have done that.
Oh, one more strange note....I wound and added a "Markov Transformer" in series with my circuit a few days ago. With it, input drops while not affecting output. Without it, input goes way up. Easy to see now, playing with lower inputs.
Any of you still thinking this is a Joule thief, just remember, that all of this work has been to "optimize" and tune the circuit, since it is only switching at 70 Hz aprox. I know for a FACT that when the switching increases, current and voltage will rise. I am looking forward to switching soon, in the KHz ranges or higher. That will be the moment of truth. But, before then, I still see areas of improvement that I have mentioned above.
Circuit below is still the one I am going to go with, with all three input choices to experiment with!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Evening ALL,
Last post for a few days and then I will be back on it...
I wanted to leave you with a couple of pictures. First is of SSG3 with wooden spacers to provide air gaps. It reduced input power, while allowing for greater output power.
The next two are of my input current. Each line on the scale is .5 x10 ma. I am at 1.5 lines.
So my earlier power input was too high... ;) It should be the following:
3.2 volts
0.0075 amps
0.024 watts (This is the number to beat!)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
hi I'm new here..
Have a look at my experiment :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXqL-HFw_xE
No measurements yet but looks promising...
-
I'm confused, I thought the leading conjecture that most in this and the other orbo thread agree on, is that pulsing the cores modifies the attractiveness that the permanent magnet experiences toward it.
...
Of course. Nevertheless it is a question of magnetic field.
As already said, "the attractiveness", supposedly a bit reduced when the magnet moves away, is not distinguishable by measurements from a leakage flux pushing it. Then there is no reason to imagine a new phenomenon when conventional physics gives the right answer to a conventional phenomenon (Okkham razor).
-
...
My point is, you can't say the magnets are vibrating in your experiment due to a leakage flux from the toroid being saturated until you rule out the other possibilities.
...
It is not to me to prove "other possibilities". You are reversing the burden of proof.
I showed that conventional physics and observations are in perfect agreement with one another. Then those who think it is neither a conventional phenomenon nor it can be explained with classical physics have to prove it.
When there are two explanations for the same phenomenon, the simpler is the right one. The simpler is one that doesn't need to rewrite the physics laws.
If physics laws do not work, where is the proof? Certainly not in a COP measurement that considers that R*I^^2 is only Joule losses, neglecting energy wasted in the underlying phenomenon of saturation.
-
hi I'm new here..
Have a look at my experiment :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXqL-HFw_xE
No measurements yet but looks promising...
Hi Jaculat,
Looks good. Perhaps post a circuit. My guess is that you are using a lot of power, even from the 9v bulb. It can draw over 250 ma at 9 volts to light 3 LED's.
Take some power input measurments and use air gaps between mags and toroids and coils. Should help lower your input and increase output.
-
Mainly it's based on naudins generator with few modifications. Generator based on 555 with ability to adjust frequency and impulse. for powering lm317. On 9V battery its about 4,5 V on input but power measurement is with generator on same input so I need to separate it, to make it true.
I need to make output circuit to get full power to measure...
-
Good job and welcome to the forum Jaculat. Please keep us updated on your progress.
Below is a prototype concept of a monopole solid state generator (monoSSgen) based around the Valstad Coil I quickly drew up. There is a possibility for a lot of different configurations with this monoSSgen, including putting it inside a pickup coil. This concept is not complete and is provided only as a building block for a monoSSgen. The cylinder magnet in the image may need to be replaced with a sphere.
Magnetic monopoles detected in a real magnet, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8083.0
Lee Valstad says his coil produces a "true monopole field, one with two poles both of which are the same charge", http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:Magnetic_monopole_-_new_experiment_corroborates_Quantum_Ring_Theory#Valstad_Coil
The other pole is more than likely contained inside, so it wouldn't be a true monopole field, but a virtual monopole field should have some interesting effects.
GB
-
Quick question: A permanent magnet changes the inducance of a coil, when setting up a resonant circuit - do you use the inductance measurement without the magnet (operating with magnet), or the measurement with magnet?
Having small trouble tuning my tank circuit.
Thanks!
-
Quick question: A permanent magnet changes the inducance of a coil, when setting up a resonant circuit - do you use the inductance measurement without the magnet (operating with magnet), or the measurement with magnet?
Having small trouble tuning my tank circuit.
Thanks!
I wonder if this is a case of parametric oscillation requiring
the disciplines of parametric resonance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametric_oscillator
-
Quick question: A permanent magnet changes the inducance of a coil, when setting up a resonant circuit - do you use the inductance measurement without the magnet (operating with magnet), or the measurement with magnet?
Having small trouble tuning my tank circuit.
Thanks!
@void109,
I gave a quick rundown on how I was planning to do a similar trial and it requires the tank circuit be tuned with the magnet in the toroid coil but not near any pickup coil. The reasoning is if the load is directly related to the input then it will cause the coil to change frequency and no longer be tuned to the original frequency.
This will be tricky because it may also change frequency because of an increase in the off time cycle due the load delaying the feedback field and causing a shift in the core permeability. The signal will need to be monitored with a scope to see if the load affects the signal input during the coil on time or off time.
-
Well - I tuned the frequency to the L measured WITH the magnet attached. I set up a parallel tank circuit. Turns out when using a scope on the toroid inductor, its pretty easy to "eyeball" the right frequency watching the scope (using the initial measurement as a starting point of course). When its resonating, its a nice and pretty sine wave, if you diverge higher or lower from optimal, its a nasty ugly thing of a signal.
Given that, the frequency I calculated prior to powering the circuit (again WITH the magnet) appears to be optimal.
I threw a pickup coil (not a great one) on my setup, and started pulling a small voltage/current, and noted that the sine wave on the scope didn't change, nor the current coming from the power supply - not exactly scientific, I was in a hurry - I'll try to get a more precise arrangement in the coming days and I'll make a video with the results.
-
Well - I tuned the frequency to the L measured WITH the magnet attached. I set up a parallel tank circuit. Turns out when using a scope on the toroid inductor, its pretty easy to "eyeball" the right frequency watching the scope (using the initial measurement as a starting point of course). When its resonating, its a nice and pretty sine wave, if you diverge higher or lower from optimal, its a nasty ugly thing of a signal.
Given that, the frequency I calculated prior to powering the circuit (again WITH the magnet) appears to be optimal.
I threw a pickup coil (not a great one) on my setup, and started pulling a small voltage/current, and noted that the sine wave on the scope didn't change, nor the current coming from the power supply - not exactly scientific, I was in a hurry - I'll try to get a more precise arrangement in the coming days and I'll make a video with the results.
Excellent! I was wondering how much the load would affect the input, that's why I was thinking of going right to the jugular, and placing it inside of a section of copper pipe to short any output with maximum load.
If indeed it does not change the resonate frequency, it would be amazing!
-
I don't accept Lee Valstad's opinion about his coil producing a true monopole. I look at his coil being similar to a halbach array, where one pole is internal and the other pole is external. In the case of two toroidal coils intersecting in the same plane, one pole will be external and the other pole will be internal.
The center of the coil is where the external field emanates from and the opposite pole will be found in only very weak bands along the perimeter. I wonder if we could wrap 1 turn of wire along the circumference of the toroids for each layer to cancel the weak pole. This would mean having only one pole emanating from the center of the coil and the other pole would be contained inside.
This would be similar to a halbach toroid array. Maybe I should rename it to haSSgen so it would be more accepted for experimentation (the "ha" would refer to a Halbach array). Has anyone here ever experimented with a Toroidal Halbach Array? Let's not leave this stone unturned.
GB
-
Well - I tuned the frequency to the L measured WITH the magnet attached. I set up a parallel tank circuit. Turns out when using a scope on the toroid inductor, its pretty easy to "eyeball" the right frequency watching the scope (using the initial measurement as a starting point of course). When its resonating, its a nice and pretty sine wave, if you diverge higher or lower from optimal, its a nasty ugly thing of a signal.
Given that, the frequency I calculated prior to powering the circuit (again WITH the magnet) appears to be optimal.
I threw a pickup coil (not a great one) on my setup, and started pulling a small voltage/current, and noted that the sine wave on the scope didn't change, nor the current coming from the power supply - not exactly scientific, I was in a hurry - I'll try to get a more precise arrangement in the coming days and I'll make a video with the results.
@void109
This is where many go wrong in thinking that finding the nice overly stretched sine wave is the top of the world. But in reality, and more often then not, if you put an appropriate light bulb on the load, even if it only flickers slightly, you will soon realize that it is not happening at the stretched wave, but slightly off that, at the ugly wave where all the action happens.
-
Of course. Nevertheless it is a question of magnetic field.
As already said, "the attractiveness", supposedly a bit reduced when the magnet moves away, is not distinguishable by measurements from a leakage flux pushing it. Then there is no reason to imagine a new phenomenon when conventional physics gives the right answer to a conventional phenomenon (Okkham razor).
Hi.
This is my first post here, although I've been posting on the Steorn forum for a few a weeks.
Your explanation sounds perfectly reasonable but it does not take into account that N and S poles are both facing the coil and equidistant from the coil, so there shouldn't be any net push (or pull) from flux leakage.
-
I'm confused, I thought the leading conjecture that most in this and the other orbo thread agree on, is that pulsing the cores modifies the attractiveness that the permanent magnet experiences toward it. A phrase I've seen thrown around alot is that "the toroid becomes invisible to the magnet". While it seems that isnt the case, invisible, it seems obvious that the attraction is lessened.
If the attractiveness the magnet experiences toward the toroid is oscillating - it seems obvious that it would vibrate (however slightly). It seems that you are disagreeing with this hypothesis that's been thrown around for months. In this case, I suppose you could said the toroids magnetic field was acting on the magnet, but in a completely indirect manner, right?
Your first explanation is consistent with the way orbo is constructed, so stick with it.
The second might apply if only one N pole or one S pole was facing the coil. However since there are two opposite poles equidistant from the coil there can't be a net push on the magnets.
-
I found this patent application in regards to the haSSgen concept I posted earlier (two toroids intersecting in the same plane, similar to a "figure-8 construction" mentioned in the application), http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090096219
ENERGY GENERATION APPARATUS AND METHODS BASED UPON MAGNETIC FLUX SWITCHING:
A "Figure-8" construction comprises two continuous loops of magnetizable material sharing a magnetizable member common to both loops. Each loop further includes two flux switches operated in a 2.times.2 sequence to sequentially reverse the flux through the magnetizable member. A relatively small amount of electrical power is used to control the magnetic flux of a permanent magnet by switching the flux between alternate paths. The resulting power from the switched magnetic flux yields substantially more power than the power required for the input switching.
[0016] The first and second loops may be toroidal in shape, and the loops may be spaced apart from one another, with A opposing C, 1 opposing 3, B opposing D and 2 opposing 4. The magnetizable member in this case is preferably a separate piece of material. Alternatively, the first and second loops may form a "Figure-8" shape, with the two loops intersecting to form the magnetizable member.
[0050] The current driving the reluctance switches in the prescribed 2.times.2 sequence should have a sharp rise in the leading edge (Tr) of each pulse with a pulse width (Pw) and Amperage value that are sustained until released at the end of the pulse width (Tf). The table below shows the effects of input current pulse rise times (Tr) on the output. These exists a narrow band of Tr, before which there is small power output, at which there are excellent power output and CoPs (coefficients of performance) in the range of 200 to 400 or greater, and after which there is no major increase in power output. The CoP of this device without the coupling circuit is defined as "Output power/Drive Power" for the switches
GB
-
I found this patent application in regards to the haSSgen concept I posted earlier (two toroids intersecting in the same plane, similar to a "figure-8 construction" mentioned in the application), http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090096219
ENERGY GENERATION APPARATUS AND METHODS BASED UPON MAGNETIC FLUX SWITCHING:
A "Figure-8" construction comprises two continuous loops of magnetizable material sharing a magnetizable member common to both loops. Each loop further includes two flux switches operated in a 2.times.2 sequence to sequentially reverse the flux through the magnetizable member. A relatively small amount of electrical power is used to control the magnetic flux of a permanent magnet by switching the flux between alternate paths. The resulting power from the switched magnetic flux yields substantially more power than the power required for the input switching.
[0016] The first and second loops may be toroidal in shape, and the loops may be spaced apart from one another, with A opposing C, 1 opposing 3, B opposing D and 2 opposing 4. The magnetizable member in this case is preferably a separate piece of material. Alternatively, the first and second loops may form a "Figure-8" shape, with the two loops intersecting to form the magnetizable member.
[0050] The current driving the reluctance switches in the prescribed 2.times.2 sequence should have a sharp rise in the leading edge (Tr) of each pulse with a pulse width (Pw) and Amperage value that are sustained until released at the end of the pulse width (Tf). The table below shows the effects of input current pulse rise times (Tr) on the output. These exists a narrow band of Tr, before which there is small power output, at which there are excellent power output and CoPs (coefficients of performance) in the range of 200 to 400 or greater, and after which there is no major increase in power output. The CoP of this device without the coupling circuit is defined as "Output power/Drive Power" for the switches
GB
http://www.google.com/patents?id=FS6gAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
-
If this patent was really working, why is there no devices available ??? ??? ???
I'll bet anything this is just a typical bogus patent, as all others concerning
energy generation from static flux switching. It simply can't work!
The purpose of the B/H curve is to describe the loss of a magnetic cycle.
And these materials might have pretty low losses but they are in no way overunity.
No matter how you pulse them there is always losses in each cycle.
And any added magnets to the core will just shift the B/H curve working point.
This translates to even higher losses due to larger flux swing and increased hysteresis loss.
I know I will get hell for this post but please think before rejecting these facts. I'm not lying!
-
If this patent was really working, why is there no devices available ??? ??? ???
I'll bet anything this is just a typical bogus patent, as all others concerning
energy generation from static flux switching. It simply can't work!
The purpose of the B/H curve is to describe the loss of a magnetic cycle.
And these materials might have pretty low losses but they are in no way overunity.
No matter how you pulse them there is always losses in each cycle.
And any added magnets to the core will just shift the B/H curve working point.
This translates to even higher losses due to larger flux swing and increased hysteresis loss.
I know I will get hell for this post but please think before rejecting these facts. I'm not lying!
Please see this thread:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.60
And please make sure you read ALL of the material at http://jlnlab.com regarding his 2SGen project.
Then tell me what you think. I went and read all of your previous posts (its early and I was curious), not a single positive or encouraging post. Kind of reminds me of that little bird-like critter that sat at Jabba the Hut's throne, feeding off his fat, and cackling at the misfortune of those about to perish. :)
-
I've seen and read these topics and sites but there is no
evidence on overunity except the authors own words.
And this doesn't count. There has to be completely
independent replications from people who know how to
perform accurate tests and measurements.
It simply has be the day job of the test staff.
And their findings must be verified by open independent replication.
I'm sorry to say this but JLN labs doesn't count in this matter.
None of the JLN replications have been released for independent verification.
And why hasn't JLN let anyone test his devices...simply because they don't work.
Just think Occam's Razor !!!
-
Fat chance
Does this guy meet your criteria?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc
Where not trying to do the undoable !
Just trying to understand the Space between the places !
So's we can do what the bug does[without a sledgehammer].
Yah see its not silly..............[this quest for OU]
We just have to learn [about that space between the places] how to change the way things are and make them how they could be.
And we most definitely are learning ,a little bit more every day!
Hugs and kisses ,
Chet
-
@Wings: Thanks for the related patent with drawings.
GB
-
I'm sorry to say this but JLN labs doesn't count in this matter.
None of the JLN replications have been released for independent verification.
And why hasn't JLN let anyone test his devices...simply because they don't work.
You truly baffle me. I think JLN has been more up front, and has disclosed more about every facet of what he does than anyone I've known. I've replicated much of what he's posted in my own garage, as have countless others. You are implying that he 'hasn't released replications' because he knows 'they don't work'. That's just false.
-
Yeah...that was funny with the pistol shrimp. :D
I liked it a lot. Nature always comes up with cool solutions.
Regarding the search for overunity I always follow the discussions and new topics.
What I don't understand is why folks are drawn back to the old non working stuff.
Forget about Newman, SSG motors or Megs. They don't work. And we know why.
Yes, learning is good but not from JLN or Bearden. They are not serious at all.
I've been around to long to accept crackpots or ignorant perception.
I'm so tired on all bad testing or hidden test procedures. Avoid ignorance at all cost.
-
I've replicated much of what he's posted in my own garage, as have countless others. You are implying that he 'hasn't released replications' because he knows 'they don't work'. That's just false.
If anything you replicated was overunity you would be famous and rich by now.
Well...are you?
-
http://www.google.com/patents?id=FS6gAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Here's a patent with images to the "figure-8 configuration" I previously posted, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=378
It appears both patents are using the same concept with slight modifications. I think the same individuals have a few more similar patents along the same line.
GB
-
...
Yes, learning is good but not from JLN or Bearden. They are not serious at all.
Bearden's blah never gave tangible products. He is a FE guru.
JLN is very different. The problem with JLN is the interpretation of what he observes: his explanations are biased. Nevertheless his experiments are rather well performed (except some measurements) and documented. They are reproducible and instructive. So imho we should reject many of his explanations and his conclusions about OU but not the remaining experimental matter.
I've been around to long to accept crackpots or ignorant perception.
I'm so tired on all bad testing or hidden test procedures. Avoid ignorance at all cost.
I agree with you.
-
If anything you replicated was overunity you would be famous and rich by now.
Well...are you?
I dont think either I nor him (I may be wrong) have claimed OU. As far as I can tell, he's just running interesting experiments with interesting results. And even if I did have an OU device, which I dont, how does that translate to instant wealth. You are just being beligerant.
-
A Pleasant Evening to ALL,
I am back from my travels, where I also had the opportunity to think through several ideas....
One of them did not work, but the other...WOW!! Doubled my Amperage and it continues to rise, but the rotor comes to a stop. And I think I can get it to increase some more... :o INPUT power is down... :D
First, the latest Power data and then an explanation of what I did and why:
INPUT into the SSG3:
3.2 Volts
5 milliamps
0.016 Power
OUTPUT from the SSG3:
0.8 Volts
2.5 milliamps
0.002 Power
SSG3 still being switched at between 50 and 70 Hz by rotor and reed switch... ;) Wow, wait till I give it some speed!!
Tonights super successful experiment that worked:
I have been still thinking on ways of manipulating magnetic flux in a physical manner, and have been playing with magnets and aluminum this evening. Suddenly it occurred to me, that a small portion of the magnetic flux might be either diverted, or delayed to increase power production...
So.o.o, I added one large piece of very thin aluminum sheeting between the two popsicle sticks being used for my air gap between the large magnet and bottom coil. (bottom coil also has a toroid and magnets UNDER said toroid in attraction to Large said magnet)
It worked, WOW, and doubled my amperage out! Why exactly? I can only speculate in my minds visualization of the fields. But now I must optimize that piece, length, height, etc., and then try some more aluminum sheeting in other "strategic" places, being sure to not let the aluminum touch either the magnet or coil.
Very encouraged,
Bruce
-
I dont think either I nor him (I may be wrong) have claimed OU. As far as I can tell, he's just running interesting experiments with interesting results. And even if I did have an OU device, which I dont, how does that translate to instant wealth. You are just being beligerant.
JLN has claimed OU results in several replications. First one I recall is the MEG.
If you had a real working OU device without any doubt, all you'd have to do is to let it be independently verified by a serious
organization, like a university or similar, and by their help and support you could either sell rights or start producing the device.
Meanwhile you would become famous due to all the publicized articles in acknowledged scientific magazines.
-
If you had a real working OU device without any doubt, all you'd have to do is to let it be independently verified by a serious
organization, like a university or similar, and by their help and support you could either sell rights or start producing the device.
Meanwhile you would become famous due to all the publicized articles in acknowledged scientific magazines.
how faux-naïf... ::) in reality, you would be ostracized just like pons and fleischmann, and just like pons and fleischmann, your work would quickly gain a reputation as pathological science.
-
how faux-naïf... ::) in reality, you would be ostracized just like pons and fleischmann, and just like pons and fleischmann, your work would quickly gain a reputation as pathological science.
No, this would not be the case if it was really working beyond all doubt.
And I'm not talking about some small and strange anomalies here.
I mean a strong and useful output of several kilowatts which can't be mistaken for measurement errors.
-
Here's a patent with images to the "figure-8 configuration" I previously posted, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=378
It appears both patents are using the same concept with slight modifications. I think the same individuals have a few more similar patents along the same line.
GB
@ GB
VIRTUAL AIR GAP
nice reading ;)
http://www.ele.utoronto.ca/~lehn/conference_papers/CP16.pdf
-
Good afternoon Everyone,
I am feeling chipper this morning! LOL
The information to purchase Brooks Coils Identical to mine:
http://www.coilwinding.us/ Is their Website
Polytech Coil Winding is their name.
Tell them you want to order, "Bruce's Brooks Coils" when you call.
They will only accept Paypal, I believe, for payment. These coils are good for many experiments.
Experimental Note:
I forgot to mention last night, that when the Aluminum was added, there is tremendous vibration now of the SSG3, when running on 12v.
I always believed that SM wrapped the collectors in Aluminum wires as the control wires on the TPU, for many reasons, including the fact that when asked if the control wires were copper, he replied, OTHER. I know they are not steel, and when I wrapped an exact replica of the 6" TPU, according to the given winding instructions, I used steel wire for the controls and weighed it. Determined the weight if I had used aluminum wire and found it would have matched exactly to the engineers reports stated weight, less an ounce or two for electronics and battery.
Now, I am solidly convinced. magnet, alum control wires, copper stranded collector, three freq's to intermodulate. 30.075 KHz 222 KHz and 115 KHz for a 15" TPU. Sorry for getting off track here, I just thought I would mention this...
Cheers,
Bruce
-
hout any doubt, all you'd have to do is to let it be independently verified by a serious
organization, like a university or similar, and by their help and support you could either sell rights or start producing the device.
Meanwhile you would become famous due to all the publicized articles in acknowledged scientific magazines.
Any version of the 2sGen is "over unity," because all of the energy going through the toroid can be accounted for, but none of the energy coming out of the pickup coil can be.
Your output isn't larger than your input, sure, but your total energy present in the system (toroid coil and pickup coil) when it's running is greater than the energy in the system when it's off.
You can't show any energy being removed from the toroid circuit that is appearing in the pickup coil. The energy in the pickup coil isn't being converted from anything in the circuit.
It's OU, it's just not usable for anything.
-
Any version of the 2sGen is "over unity," because all of the energy going through the toroid can be accounted for, but none of the energy coming out of the pickup coil can be.
...
False assertion. When a part of the ferrite core is saturated, there are strong flux leakages every where around. When current is drawn from a pickup coil coupled to this change of flux, energy is provided by the source of the change of flux, which is the current in the toroid coil.
-
Hi all
another clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDRJFfpFzuI
-
Experimental Note:
I forgot to mention last night, that when the Aluminum was added, there is tremendous vibration now of the SSG3, when running on 12v.
I always believed that SM wrapped the collectors in Aluminum wires as the control wires on the TPU, for many reasons, including the fact that when asked if the control wires were copper, he replied, OTHER. I know they are not steel, and when I wrapped an exact replica of the 6" TPU, according to the given winding instructions, I used steel wire for the controls and weighed it. Determined the weight if I had used aluminum wire and found it would have matched exactly to the engineers reports stated weight, less an ounce or two for electronics and battery.
Now, I am solidly convinced. magnet, alum control wires, copper stranded collector, three freq's to intermodulate. 30.075 KHz 222 KHz and 115 KHz for a 15" TPU. Sorry for getting off track here, I just thought I would mention this...
Cheers,
Bruce
@Bruce_TPU
Yes sirreeeeee. That is all part of the test list for verification of as many variables as possible.
Regarding your stacked coils, from what I have learned doing my videos, I think you may consider stacking them off center, meaning put the first one on the table, then the core of the second to go over the center of the first, then the core of the third to go on the center of the second and so on. I made a quick diagram below. I would be very curious to know if the coupling effect is increased.
-
Hi all
another clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDRJFfpFzuI
Hi Jaculat,
I liked your video, just a quick couple of questions for you. In your little write up on youtube, you say, "I've noticed that at higher freq current drops more than 10 times."
Are you talking about input current into your toroids? Not output current to your LED's correct?
At what frequency did you see the ten time drop in current?
And lastly, could you post your 555 circuit and your input circuit pls.
Sorry about all of the questions, but they are important to my work.
@ Wattsup
I tried that early on, and it was promising, but then I added the bias on the outside of the brooks, as well as the interior bias winding and then the steel wire core inside of that. And without all of that, I get very little output.
Great ideas though and please keep them coming!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce_TPU
I meant input current. Ne555 circuit is basic astable generator with freq and impulse regulation you can find many types everywhere... Don't know exact freq but more than 10 kHz I assume. Led works best at 1-3 kHz but current is high. I have only 1 meter so I can't measure 2 parameters at ones....
-
Bruce sorry I didn't fully answer to your question...
I used Naudins circuit based on ne555, buz11 but instead 8V stabilizer I've used Lm 317 but on clip it's without it because it drops voltage by around 1,5V and this battery was bit to week (I'm using it when I'm connecting big 12V battery to make voltage 6-6,5V). When I'll finish main generator (2 missing big magnets + proper pickup coils) I'll separate 555 powering from buz11 powering for better IN/OUT power measurement. I'm working on website where I'll publish all detailed info ASAP...
-
Here's a patent with images to the "figure-8 configuration" I previously posted, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=378
It appears both patents are using the same concept with slight modifications. I think the same individuals have a few more similar patents along the same line.
GB
The aperture or curved slot in the toroid material, through which a wire coil is wound as a reluctance switch in this patent is a tremendous input cost saver. Imagine a Toroid with two such windings at opposite ends of the Toroid, and a magnet stack in the middle. Energizing these miniature windings at each end of the Toroid would raise the reluctance at the point where the magnets touch the Toroid to the saturation point, demagnetizing the hemispheres to each side. A coil wrap around the Toroid like the one currently used to energize and saturate the entire core could then be used as an output coil. Cop's of the Figure Eight Energy Generation Apparatus reportedly exceed 400. Input current could be reduced to such a low level with the addition of their aperture coil wrapped reluctance switch method at each end of the stand alone Toroid, so as to achieve even higher Cop's.
The magnets would have to be right at or just slightly below saturation level strength. A few thin copper coil wraps right around the toroid at each end of the magnets would be enough to increase reluctance at those points to completely block the flux path to the remainder of the toroid. Pulse width and frequency of these tiny wraps would have to be timed and fashioned to seat the power inside the new hysteresis curve. It would work a bit differently from JLN's version, with the magnet here supplying nearly all the power and the input at a bare minimum. Two output coil wraps, one to each side of the reluctance switches could be connected to allow for more accurate spacing. Gangs of these toroids could run off the same circuit with just a very very small amount of input. Switch input could be gauged to keep the cycle at the high non linear end of the M H curve.
-
Happy Sunday Everyone,
Well, I continue to wait on my L Meter. It has shipped from Hong Kong and I do expect it to arrive any day.
In the meantime, a couple of things. Playing around with a .082uF 630 VDC Metal Poly Cap, I set my output up as a tank. (not sure of resonance until L Meter arrives) and the voltage rose to 74 VAC. This was new, because the highest non load voltage I had achieved was about 31 - 32 volts before this. This was running at 12 V input.
I think it is just converting milliamps to voltage here and not sure of any benefit.
Now, I did notice an interesting thing, that the center solonoid winding that is inserted down through the center of the Brooks fields as an inside bias, that if I attempt to tap off of that in any kind of way, my output amps drop to next to nothing. So.o.o, I think that this is the first coil that I will make a resonant tank out of and see if its ringing doesn't affect the output for the positive.
I am quickly coming to a close on any further "optimizations" aside from the big one of resonance. If I can drop the input power while bumping output even a little more with resonance, that would be deemed by me as successful.
Lastly, I am going to have to build a 555 timer with freq adj and pw adjustment. Alex has sent me a circuit. I am going to order parts this week and begin work on it. It will be the final and best opportunity to achieve the goal. I have no intention of having to use calculus to show proof of overunity. In that case, I would not even enter it. Simple math of power (wattage) in versus power out. Either it will or it won't. I feel I have done a lot to optimize or "amplify" the output to the greatest extent possible. Now, if a higher frequency input and high frequency switching, drops input power and raises output by a bit, I may actually cross that bridge of COP >1...LOL If not, then I have learned a great deal that can be applied to another project... ;) P.S. On a side note...don't think nothing is being done with the TPU...experiments are ongoing by others, using intermodulation to produce those wonderful harmonics. One day I hope to have experimental proof. Anywho, that is for another day...LOL
I might make a video this week showing SSG3 in operation in 12 volt mode...LOL, it is one noisy, vibrating contraption!
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Closer examination of the Figure Eight patent reveals a single hole in an earlier version. This looks pretty easy to do; Just drill about an 1/8th inch hole to start somewhere in the middle of the Toroid material, then wrap a very thin copper wire to the inside. The magnets, gauged in power to nearly but not saturate the material would be placed against the edge of the Toroid as usual, in adjacency with a spacer gap in between. Pulsing the tiny inductor coil reluctance switch should generate power if one were to place the toroid over a copper wire wound output coil, with much less input then the larger wrap. Once again this would work backwards, with the magnets nearly saturating the toroid and the reluctance switch setting the control point for the demagnetization.
Two tiny inductors, one at each end with a horseshoe magnet clamped to the toroid would allow for tank resonance between the two, reducing input even less. The output coil could simply be wound directly over the toroid like the current inductor.
@Bruce- your new 555 timer circuit with pulse width and frequency adjustment might power a tiny reluctance switch with very little input.
If overunity eludes you, you might care to try this approach with a finemet noncrystalline toroid core.
-
Lastly, I am going to have to build a 555 timer with freq adj and pw A. Alex has sent me a circuit. I am going to order parts this week and begin work on it.
Check out the 'Velleman dc to pulse width modulator' on google. It is a complete kit and has freq adj and Pw adj. Cheap as $22.00 before shipping. I've used it for years with no problems.
Regards, Larry
-
Check out the 'Velleman dc to pulse width modulator' on google. It is a complete kit and has freq adj and Pw adj. Cheap as $22.00 before shipping. I've used it for years with no problems.
Regards, Larry
Hi Larry,
That would be awesome...I just can't seem to find it...LOL I have found Velleman scopes etc, but not as you describe. If you would be kind enough to provide a link, I would be very grateful.
Thanks!
Bruce
EDIT:
I found this one on the Web, is it the one you refer to?
http://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&productId=120539
-
Bruce,
It's probably the Velleman K8004 kit that Larry is mentioning. Here's a typical link for it:
http://www.apogeekits.com/pulse_width_modulator.htm (http://www.apogeekits.com/pulse_width_modulator.htm)
tak
-
Bruce,
It's probably the Velleman K8004 kit that Larry is mentioning. Here's a typical link for it:
http://www.apogeekits.com/pulse_width_modulator.htm (http://www.apogeekits.com/pulse_width_modulator.htm)
tak
Hi Tak,
Thanks, that is the one that I thought.
@ ALL
My only concern is that the frequency appears limited to 5KHz, otherwise it would appear to be a great buy. I wonder if there could be a way to up that frequency range without redesigning the whole circuit?
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Bruce, I am using a small microcontroller kit as pulse generator:
http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardDuemilanove
It can be programmed in quite a simple manner using an USB cable (not included) and a PC.
Using the Arduino kit I can program it to generate up to 4 Mhz using assembler, but it can be programmed in C+ as well, although it is less efficient. Using C+ may limit the output frequency to approx 1 Mhz.
Output is 5 Vpp
Seems good enough for your experiments.
Costs: 25-28 euro.
Locations to buy: click the 'buy' link at the top of that page and it will give you the most popular sales addresses.
-
Yes 5V output voltage, but you should use a transistor after that! The current which mikrocontroller boards can deliver are usually in the mA range and by no way enough to run something which needs power in the Watt-range.
-
Yes 5V output voltage, but you should use a transistor after that! The current which mikrocontroller boards can deliver are usually in the mA range and by no way enough to run something which needs power in the Watt-range.
My SSG3 only needs 5 mA at 3.2 volts to run... I am not sure why you are thinking I need "in the Watt range."
Cheers,
Bruce
-
@A,
JLN's operating frequencies range from 200Hz to 3.3Khz. 5KHz would give you plenty of spread for the mere twenty dollars or so in cost. Skipping over this bargain with it's effective range for the much more complex arduino programable circuit and increased cost would complicate your job way too much, when your effective operating ranges are much lower. Remember, the natural oscillating frequency of magnetism is 159 Hz. Look at JLN's top range of 3.3 you'll see it's a multiple of 20. Higher range multiples begin to diminish effectiveness. These inexpensive circuits are perfect for your kind of experimentation.
-
@Bruce,
JLN's operating frequencies range from 200Hz to 3.3Khz. 5KHz would give you plenty of spread for the mere twenty dollars or so in cost. Skipping over this bargain with it's effective range for the much more complex arduino programable circuit and increased cost would complicate your job way too much, when you're effective operating ranges are much lower. Remember, the natural oscillating frequency of magnetism is 159 Hz. Look at JLN's top range of 3.3 you'll see it's a multiple of 20. Higher range multiples begin to diminish effectiveness. These inexpensive circuits are perfect for your kind of experimentation.
freeware:
Waveform generator
If the frequency are in the low range my suggestion is to download this program and use the audio output from your computer.
with the microphone input you can monitor like an oscilloscope up to 197kHz.
Plus you have:
Spectrum Analyzer
Frequency meter
Volt meter
Filtering
Memo windows
real time DIGITAL/ANALOG conversion
ZRLC-meter with Vector scope
......make a donation
http://www.sillanumsoft.org/prod01.htm
-
Here is a picture of Kunel's patent for his flux toroid generator. One can see how simple the concept is; Just a magnet set inside a toroid with pulsed reluctance switches on either side. Very similar in concept to the Ennis and Eberly aperature reluctance winding, with a small drill hole and pulsed reluctance winding between the magnet and body of the toroid.
-
@A,
JLN's operating frequencies range from 200Hz to 3.3Khz. 5KHz would give you plenty of spread for the mere twenty dollars or so in cost. Skipping over this bargain with it's effective range for the much more complex arduino programable circuit and increased cost would complicate your job way too much, when your effective operating ranges are much lower. Remember, the natural oscillating frequency of magnetism is 159 Hz. Look at JLN's top range of 3.3 you'll see it's a multiple of 20. Higher range multiples begin to diminish effectiveness. These inexpensive circuits are perfect for your kind of experimentation.
Hi Synchro,
I think that I would have to agree with you. It is certainly not the money, but putting it together...LOL I have some gifts, but that is not one of them. But I guess it will be good practice. I wish they sold them already built. It is a 40 piece kit, and is what I was hesitant about. ;)
I am also going to build Alex's circuit. It is 20 parts or so and I have some excellent tech support!
I will be ordering everything, Kits and Parts for Alex's circuit, today and tomorrow. I have been working with Alex on making sure I order the correct parts.
Cheers and thanks for the great feedback!
Bruce
-
wings
I was trying it on my laptop and I've notice that square wave at hi freq doesn't look squarish at all and on mic you can measure up to 20kHz also amp is to low (up to 1V) so you need to amplify it (on gen) and on mic max voltage is +/-1,5 V. It depends of music card but not to much.
In my opinion ne555 is best solution price/capabilities
-
[A author=Bruce_TPU link=topic=8597.msg234064#msg234064 date=1269377654]
Hi Synchro,
I think that I would have to agree with you. It is certainly not the money, but putting it together...LOL I have some gifts, but that is not one of them. But I guess it will be good practice. I wish they sold them already built. It is a 40 piece kit, and is what I was hesitant about. ;)
[/quote]
Bruce,
The Velleman kit has a Printed circuit board with each part displayed and parts presented in order, which makes it extremely easy to assemble the 40 pieces. I'm sure with your demonstrated abilities it will be easy to build.
Regards, Larry
-
Hi Larry,
Thank you for the words of confidence... A rare thing sometimes on this forum.
I will buy it, and build it. I am curious how SSG3 will respond. I remain hopeful of success.
-
Hi Folks,
Here is an independently variable duty and frequency pulse gen from the 555 timer. Use the CMOS type 555 like LMC555 or TLC555 to get as high as 2MHz output pulses and low power consumption.
rgds, Gyula
-
Hi Folks,
Here is an independently variable duty and frequency pulse gen from the 555 timer. Use the CMOS type 555 like LMC555 or TLC555 to get as high as 2MHz output pulses and low power consumption.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
Wow, that is a simple circuit. I ended up ordering that kit last night... LOL
I may build yours as well and compare the two. I think if I have any hope of seeing OU in my SSG3, I will certainly need a low power consumption pulser. Thank you for posting that.
Also, my L Meter arrived today! Yea! I will soon have some inductance readings for you. I will need your help figuring out caps for resonance. Thank you as always for your assistance.
Kind regards,
Bruce
EDIT:
Center Bias Coil Inductance = .959 mh
Capacitance is aprox 48.8 uF
All 5 brooks output coils together at the output in parallel = .60 H (problem with top coil leads, long story)
Capacitance is aprox 41.2 uF
-
Bruce
potentiometers should be linear type for best adjustment.
If you want to separate generator form your powering circuit use opto-isolator. Your power consumption will be without power used by generator...
-
Hi Gyula,
Wow, that is a simple circuit. I ended up ordering that A last night... LOL
I may build yours as well and compare the two. I think if I have any hope of seeing OU in my SSG3, I will certainly need a low power consumption pulser. Thank you for posting that.
Also, my L Meter arrived today! Yea! I will soon have some inductance readings for you. I will need your help figuring out caps for resonance. Thank you as always for your assistance.
Kind regards,
Bruce
EDIT:
Center Bias Coil Inductance = .959 mh
Capacitance is aprox 48.8 uF
All 5 brooks output coils together at the output in parallel = .60 H (problem with top coil leads, long story)
Capacitance is aprox 41.2 uF
Hi Bruce,
I cannot recall your correct output frequency (was it 70Hz?) or frequencies, they are needed for the capacitance calculation, once you know the coils inductance values from the L meter. Would you write it again, I do not want to wade through so many mails, sorry for that.
Also, it would be good if you measure the coils DC resistance (if they are in series, or in parallel, then the resultant) it would be good for estimating the generator output resistance (because the coils will serve as generator output). This will help to find the optimum load resistance at which the maximum output can be received.
My only "problem" with your Brooks coil is that they have a rather high DC resistance, if I recall, about 254 Ohms for one such coil. It is ok that the geometry this coil has insures the biggest inductance possible for that given wire length but for generator coils such a high DC resistance is normally 'hunch on the back' because if load it with say only 10mA current, the voltage drop 'inside' the coil will be 2.54V and this heats the coil only, it never comes out, except in heat. And a 10mA demand in a load current is not an extra wish for sure.
You would wish to use coils for generating electricity with much lower copper resistance, this means using thinner wires. I know this is bad news for you but once I have had to tell you, sorry.
rgds, Gyula
PS the best would be you measure the L value across the output wires you assign as generator outputs and also measure the DC resistance across those wires.
also, whatever other coil you wish to make resonant at a certain frequency, you measure its L value and the resistance but this latter is needed for matching purposes if any.
If the output frequency is 70 Hz, and your 6 coils have .6H inductance then the needed capacitor for resonance is 8.62 uF (4 pieces of 2 uF, a 470 nF and a 150 nF, all in parallel to make up for the 8.62 uF)
-
Groundloop posted some excerpts from the Figure 8 patent of Ennis and Eberly a few pages back, followed by a second toroid of connected Horseshoes with bridgecoils, then the attachment of Heinrich Kunel's toroid. Imagine once again a nanoperm toroid with two opposed fine wire flux blocker wraps, one on each side of the toroid, and a small magnet stack in the middle or one magnet with reversed polarity on each end of the outside. Alternate pulsing of these reluctance switches would reverse the flux beneath an output coil wrapped around the toroid like the more complex Figure eight power apparatus shows, without the special shaped core. Hienrich Kunel's patent shows how he does it with a magnet intersecting the body of the toroid, another special core adaptation. How simple would it be to do with these two tiny wraps! Look at Grounloop's schematic for his Solid State Magnetic Generator Double at the bottem of the first page of this thread, and see if this very basic approach dosen't accomplish the very same thing.
-
Hi OU crowd,
Sorry, I have not read this whole thread :P
Anyway, I'm trying to replicate the JL Naudin's 2SGEN with 'various' and 'irritating' results...
It is on: http://freenrg.info/Some_Experiments/JLN_2SGEN/ (http://freenrg.info/Some_Experiments/JLN_2SGEN/)
In short, I have not been able to get the JLN results: 35.3 V volts and -9.5 volts across the 10 K ohms Rloads respectively for the demagnetization phase and the magnetization phase. I got milli volts instead of volts.
I have also recently noticed that I could remove the magnets from the toroidal coil if I wired a secondary with about 10 turns and I shorted it!
Very Best
-
Groundloop posted some excerpts from the Figure 8 patent of Ennis and Eberly a few pages back, followed by a second toroid of connected Horseshoes with bridgecoils, then the attachment of Heinrich Kunel's toroid. Imagine once again a nanoperm toroid with two opposed fine wire flux blocker wraps, one on each side of the toroid, and a small magnet stack in the middle or one magnet with reversed polarity on each end of the outside. Alternate pulsing of these reluctance switches would reverse the flux beneath an output coil wrapped around the toroid like the more complex Figure eight power apparatus shows, without the special shaped core. Hienrich Kunel's patent shows how he does it with a magnet intersecting the body of the toroid, another special core adaptation. How simple would it be to do with these two tiny wraps! Look at Grounloop's schematic for his Solid State Magnetic Generator Double at the bottem of the first page of this thread, and see if this very basic approach dosen't accomplish the very same thing.
Keep on trying Synchro in regards to the "Figure 8". Don't give up.
The Perminvar alloys, Conpernik, Isoperm, and powdered irons have a near 0 hysteresis loss, according to the 12th page of this article and can now be viewed on Scribd without the need to download it to your computer, http://www.scribd.com/doc/28789552/SURVEY-CHARACTERISTICS-AND-EVALUATION-OF-HIGH-PERFORMANCE-MAGNETIC-CORE-MATERIALS
GB
-
Hi Bruce,
I cannot recall your correct output frequency (was it 70Hz?) or frequencies, they are needed for the capacitance calculation, once you know the coils inductance values from the L meter. Would you write it again, I do not want to wade through so many mails, sorry for that.
It is 70Hz but I suspect it will change when the new pulser is built? But this will give me a chance to experiment with it now.
Also, it would be good if you measure the coils DC resistance (if they are in series, or in parallel, then the resultant) it would be good for estimating the generator output resistance (because the coils will serve as generator output). This will help to find the optimum load resistance at which the maximum output can be received.
The output coils, all wire in parallel, measured 49.5 Ohms.
My only "problem" with your Brooks coil is that they have a rather high DC resistance, if I recall, about 254 Ohms for one such coil. It is ok that the geometry this coil has insures the biggest inductance possible for that given wire length but for generator coils such a high DC resistance is normally 'hunch on the back' because if load it with say only 10mA current, the voltage drop 'inside' the coil will be 2.54V and this heats the coil only, it never comes out, except in heat. And a 10mA demand in a load current is not an extra wish for sure.
You would wish to use coils for generating electricity with much lower copper resistance, this means using thinner wires. I know this is bad news for you but once I have had to tell you, sorry.
Our brooks coils were originally designed to be pulsed with 1000 volts to generate huge magnetic fields. So, I do understand about the heat. But will try these before I switch to coils with less resistance. That will be my next step after fully testing this present setup.
rgds, Gyula
PS the best would be you measure the L value across the output wires you assign as generator outputs and also measure the DC resistance across those wires.
also, whatever other coil you wish to make resonant at a certain frequency, you measure its L value and the resistance but this latter is needed for matching purposes if any.
The Resistance of my center Bias coil, that I wish to make a resonant tank is 1 ohm. All L values listed in above post that you quoted.
If the output frequency is 70 Hz, and your 6 coils have .6H inductance then the needed capacitor for resonance is 8.62 uF (4 pieces of 2 uF, a 470 nF and a 150 nF, all in parallel to make up for the 8.62 uF)
Hi Gyula,
Ok, I think I have all the measurements you need and highlighted them in the quote above.
Thank you,
Bruce
-
@synchro1
I'm all in on the "figure 8". So far I've acquired 4 square loop ferrites (FERROXCUBE TN36/23/15-3R1) and I've found a core manufacturer that is willing to make tape wound toroids with holes/slots with any available material and in any size.
Next step is to get a diamond drill for the ferrite cores and determine a good material/size for the tape wound, but I'll probably test with the ferrites before tape as they ain't cheap to have made up.
Have yet to pick out a magnet for the ferrites as it'll take a little more knowledge than I have right now. :) More research/learning ...
And I'd like to thank Lumen for bringing this patent to our attention! Thanks!
We probably should have a separate thread for the "figure 8".
tak
-
NerzhDishual
maybe because you use 220 and 100 ohm R3 resistor... try smaller like 5-10 ohm
-
Keep on trying Synchro in regards to the "Figure 8". Don't give up.
The Perminvar alloys, Conpernik, Isoperm, and powdered irons have a near 0 hysteresis loss, according to the 12th page of this article and can now be viewed on Scribd without the need to download it to your computer, http://www.scribd.com/A/28789552/SURVEY-CHARACTERISTICS-AND-EVALUATION-OF-HIGH-PERFORMANCE-MAGNETIC-CORE-MATERIALS
GB
The same is nanoperm. Also near 0 loss: http://www.magnetec.de/pdf/vergleich%20nano-ferrit_1.pdf
-
[author=Bruce_TPU link=topic=8597.msg234579#msg234579 date=1269570988]
Hi Gyula,
Ok, I think I have all the A you need and highlighted them in the quote above.
Thank you,
Bruce
[/quote]
Hi Bruce,
Well, then the frequency is 70 Hz, you need a 8.615 uF capacitor value for tuning out the .6H combined inductance of the 6 coils. And if you connect this capacitor in series with any one of the combined outputs of the coils, and then you use a 50 Ohm load resistance to close the other coil output with the cap's other end, you will get a matched condition for 70 Hz and the biggest power output possible from the 6 combined coils. Basically now you have a series resonant circuit at 70 Hz, with a 49.5 Ohm loss resistance due to the combined coils Dc resistances, this constitutes your generator inner impedance at resonance.
If you connect the 8.615 uF cap in parallel with the combined coils, then you would have to use a N:1 transformer to convert down the high parallel resonant impedance to your load value which can be any chosen value resistor that fits to the down convertion ratio of the transformer.
In this case the resonant impedance is as follows:
first the Q of the LC circuit is XL/R=2*Pi*70*.6/49.5=5.32
then the resonant impedance of the LC is Q*XL=5.32*263.76=1403.2 Ohm. If you wish to use ,say, a 50 Ohm load resistor, then you would have to use a transformer with a turns ratio of sqre1403.2/49.5=sqre28.347=5.32 If you happen to have a normal 60 Hz mains transformer, 120V AC to 24V then you could use it here for matching: its primary side would go parallel with the combined coils output and you load its secondary output with a 50 Ohm or so resistor. You may wish to retune the 70 Hz frequency slightly to compensate for the detuning effect of the primary transformer coil it may cause on the .6H - 8.2uF LC tank.
With a transformer having several secondary coils or taps you can math different loads to the LC tank, you do not limit yourself to the 50 Ohm single load value like in the series resonant matching case.
For your center bias coil with .959mH the capacitor value for resonance at 70 Hz is 5390.5 uF. This cannot be electrolytic type, so you have a hard task to find as many values as practical to get this hugh value from non electrolytics.
I would like to ask what are the capacitance values you included in your earlier message, where are they from?
[author=Bruce_TPU link=topic=8597.msg234330#msg234330 date=1269475183]
....
EDIT:
Center Bias Coil Inductance = .959 mh
Capacitance is aprox 48.8 uF
All 5 brooks output coils together at the output in parallel = .60 H (problem with top coil leads, long story)
Capacitance is aprox 41.2 uF
[/quote]
Thanks, Gyula
-
Hi Gyula,
They were from the mentioned coils, one of the output coils and one of the center coils. I was just curiouse of their capacitance was all and was playing with my new L meter... :)
As far as the center coil, I will begin to work on trying to source some non electrolytic and see what I can find. In my mind that is the first thing I want to try.
As far as the output coils, I will add the 8.615 uF capacitor and make it a resonant series with a 50 ohm load/resistor to start with, for testing purposes.
I will work on these two things, Gyula, and then get back with you and work on resonance for the input toroids and outer bias that are all wired in series.
Again, many thanks,
Bruce
-
...
I have also recently noticed that I could remove the magnets from the toroidal coil if I wired a secondary with about 10 turns and I shorted it!
Hi NerzhDishual,
What do the magnets do in a (toroidal) iron core? I think they magnetically bias the core towards the saturation area i.e. the B-H curve becomes assymetrical and distorted.
What does a short circuited coil do in a (toroidal) core? It magnetically biases the core too because the changing flux induces current in this coil and this current has a high value because it is limited only by the coil wire resistance. So the B-H curve becomes also assymetrical and distorted too.
It would be interesting to see whether the induced output power in the pick up coil is affected or not (probably not) by the short circuited coil, however, the resultant efficiency is surely much less than in case of using the magnets, because the extra loss the short circuit introduces reflects back in the input power as a further demand.
It is strange you received so little output from the pickup coil.
rgds, Gyula
-
.......
maybe because you use 220 and 100 ohm R3 resistor... try smaller like 5-10 ohm
.......
It would be interesting to see whether the induced output power in the pick up coil
is affected or not (probably not) by the short circuited coil, however, the resultant
efficiency is surely much less than in case of using the magnets, because
the extra loss the short circuit introduces reflects back in the input power
as a further demand.
It is strange you received so little output from the pickup coil.
rgds, Gyula
Thanks for all these feeback and advices.
I will do the experiments.
As far as I can remember, when I remove the magnets that are inside of the toroidal coil
and also when I 'un-short' the secondary wires I got nothing at the pickup coil.
Yes, I got very little output at the pickup coil. :-\
However, I have the same circuit and the same toroidal coil than JL Naudin.
I am wondering, due to such a lack of fortune in some of my replications, whether
I would be better for me to try mussels hunting or other mundane activities. ;D
Very Best
-
do what you want!
if you can?
lol
sam
-
Early Morning Everyone,
To make a long story short, I saw a picture in my studies of a device that gave me an idea to try on my SSG3...
What I did was to cut ten pieces of soft iron wire, tape their ends, and then to wind a single layer of 20awg magnet wire around it. I then placed it up against the edge of my brooks coils. This is only the first of about 8 that I will be winding. I then wired it in series with my toroids and outer bias.
Contrary to what I had read, I had expected my input current to go up...But no, just like I had read it went down. from 7 ma to 4 ma. (Nearly a 50% reduction in input power, for those that think it insignificant!) All of the subsequent ones will also be wired in series. As more of these come on line, the ideas is that everytime the pulse hits it, it becomes a weak electromagnet and puts a little power into the brooks, while at the same time, it is drastically reducing my input power.
If this trend continues, then things should get real interesting with two or three more of these.
I am awaiting my 555 timer kit to arrive. I hope it get's here before the Easter Break. I am also going to be working on matching resonance, thanks to the great help from Gyula.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Hello ALL,
And then there were two...
And my DC to pulse width converter kit arrived today! :) I hope to be building it over the holiday weekend. Lord willing...
Cheers,
Bruce
-
The Orbo solid state:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/solidstate/
-
The Orbo solid state:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/solidstate/
.....Solid State Orbo gains energy via control of a material's inductance and domain rotation. As with all previous implementations of Orbo, these material permeability effects are fundamental to the production of an energy gain. .......
3 coils 1 toroid ??? 1 shaft or 2 magnets?
1st April 2010?
-
April fool's day???
Not so sure....
Should be Sean McCarthy's puckish sense of humour.
From the Steorn forum:
http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=62996&page=1#Item_29 (http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=62996&page=1#Item_29)
"007
uphillcastle:Babcat why do you believe in it so much are you not telling us something?
Why announce this on the 1st of April?????? its just asking for trouble
Don't you get it. Steorn love doing this kind of shit. I personally think it's hilarious that they have THE most significant technology ever released and that they still have the time to take the piss out of pseudosceptics.
Welcome to the era of A."
-
April fool's day???
Not so sure....
Should be Sean McCarthy's puckish sense of humour.
From the Steorn forum:
http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=62996&page=1#Item_29 (http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=62996&page=1#Item_29)
"007
uphillcastle:Babcat why do you believe in it so much are you not telling us something?
Why announce this on the 1st of April?????? its just asking for trouble
Don't you get it. Steorn love doing this kind of shit. I personally think it's hilarious that they have THE most significant technology ever released and that they still have the time to take the piss out of pseudosceptics.
Welcome to the era of A."
Actually, the video announcing the ssOrbo was released on March 30, 2010 and not on April 1, 2010, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evIZy72uCRc Around the 57 second mark of that video, it shows software setup to handle two different frequencies, two different duty cycles, etc. ClanZer's ssOrbo replication is also showing this, http://www.overunity.org.uk/CLaNZSSpanel.jpg This is more than likely used to create an asymmetric system.
They are also releasing a lot more information into the Public Domain, including the PM Orbo, eOrbo, ssOrbo, calorimeter tests, asymmetry and energy in a magnetic system.
This document from Steorn, http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf , sets out to demonstrate that such asymmetry in itself does not lead to unexpected energy results, but that a combination of asymmetry and non-linear MH relationships does indeed lead to unexpected energy results.
GB
-
.....Solid State Orbo gains energy via control of a material's inductance and domain rotation. As with all previous implementations of Orbo, these material permeability effects are fundamental to the production of an energy gain. .......
3 coils 1 toroid ??? 1 shaft or 2 magnets?
1st April 2010?
shaft only for winding operation.
here under test?
-
This document from Steorn, http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf , sets out to demonstrate that such asymmetry in itself does not lead to unexpected energy results, but that a combination of asymmetry and non-linear MH relationships does indeed lead to unexpected energy results.
GB
GB, these are interesting findings.
However, I can't see any H-fields in the 4 experiments they show, while they mention non-linear M-H curves as key in these experiments.
Any thoughts on this?
-
GB, these are interesting findings.
However, I can't see any H-fields in the 4 experiments they show, while they mention non-linear M-H curves as key in these experiments.
Any thoughts on this?
The experimental results shown in the publication of "asymmetry and energy in magnetics" are produced by the Magnetic Torque Measurement System, details of which may be found in the document “Magnetic Torque Measurement Systemâ€, http://www.steorn.com/images/magnetic-torque-measurement-system.pdf
GB
-
The experimental results shown in the publication of "asymmetry and energy in magnetics" are produced by the Magnetic Torque Measurement System, details of which may be found in the document “Magnetic Torque Measurement Systemâ€, http://www.steorn.com/images/magnetic-torque-measurement-system.pdf
GB
Sorry GB, I don't see the connection with their measurment device/methods.
The symmetry/assymmetry description mentions M-H curves as part of the physical behaviour to use less or more or no extra energy to rotate (to be measured by any method).
It still doesn't make sense to me.
Maybe I am overlooking something.
-
Sorry GB, I don't see the connection with their measurment device/methods.
The symmetry/assymmetry description mentions M-H curves as part of the physical behaviour to use less or more or no extra energy to rotate (to be measured by any method).
It still doesn't make sense to me.
Maybe I am overlooking something.
I have a thread on this Magnetic Torque Measurement system, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8763.0
We can discuss it there, if you like. Reply #15 of that thread, offers an alternative testing method based on the spin down time. This alternative testing method should work for the PM Orbo, but the magnetic torque measurement system is needed for the eOrbo. In the ssOrbo, the magnetic torque measurement system is not needed.
The anomaly in the PM Orbo, is rotation in one direction lead to a loss of the system's kinetic energy; rotation in the opposite direction lead to a gain in the system's kinetic energy. This is due to a combination of an asymmetry system with non-linear MH relationships, which I believe the ssOrbo is also based on. Hopefully, the spin down tests will make more since to you, than the magnetic torque measurement system. The tests will show, if there isn't a non-linear MH relationship in an asymmetry system, then there will be no gain. There is also a thread for the PM Orbo, which I hope will be discussed, since the eOrbo and ssOrbo is based on the anomaly of the PM Orbo, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8991.0
GB
-
Thought I'd take a shot at this too. My Ossie motor is going well at 1mw & 1000 rpms & I need another challenge. Which page has the best setup so far in this thread?
-
Good Evening All,
I have concluded the building of my pulse kit tonight. It really wasn't that bad at all. I had purchased a small battery powered soldering gun, because it has a nice thin tip. It works so, so. I have a radio shack soldering gun that heats up well, but no small, thin tip available for it. I will have to invest in a decent soldering gun, with proper tips, in the future. I see how having the right tools for the job is so important.
I am out of town for the holidays but will return next week, and then test out my pulser and see how it goes...
Happy Ressurection Holiday to all! ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Good Evening All,
I have concluded the my pulse kit tonight. It really wasn't that bad at all.
From the Steorn page, my guess would be you get a metglas or nanoperm core with as square a loop as you can find (totally nonlinear), wrap it with a ton of thin thin wire for good inductance, then you hit the coil with a short pulse clockwise through the circuit and immediately follow that with a longer, higher powered pulse counter-clockwise through the circuit (so to speak), so you build a north magnetic field and then a bigger south magnetic field, to simulate the effect of the rotor passing by the angled magnet in the PM orbo configuration. And that same massive coil around the core collects the excess rebound from the ferrite core? But how do you fire and collect from the same coil?
The domains in these square loop coils seem to have no "entropic" state. It's like they're all aligned and flip like a switch to the opposite orientation...
I've never handled a square loop ferrite. Do they physically feel different in the presence of a magnet?
-
From the Steorn page, my guess would be you get a metglas or nanoperm core with as square a loop as you can find (totally nonlinear), wrap it with a ton of thin thin wire for good inductance, then you hit the coil with a short pulse clockwise through the circuit and immediately follow that with a longer, higher powered pulse counter-clockwise through the circuit (so to speak), so you build a north magnetic field and then a bigger south magnetic field, to simulate the effect of the rotor passing by the angled magnet in the PM orbo configuration. And that same massive coil around the core collects the excess rebound from the ferrite core? But how do you fire and collect from the same coil?
The domains in these square loop coils seem to have no "entropic" state. It's like they're all aligned and flip like a switch to the opposite orientation...
I've never handled a square loop ferrite. Do they physically feel different in the presence of a magnet?
No, a Metglas Square loop does not feel different in the presence of a magnet.
My pulser is to pulse at different frequencies, my SSG3, you can read about, further back, if interested.
Cheers,
Bruce
-
Just a few thoughts on the Steorn solid state orbo....
To me it looks like Steorn has three coils around a ferrite cylinder with a bias magnet in the middle. They probably have an external asymmetrical magnet on the outside. I could be wrong about the magnet placement... ie the asymmetrical magnet on the inside, and bias on the outside. I think they are using the three coils to perform heterodyne frequency multiplication with the non linear part of the M-H curve of the ferrite. Two coils input the two low frequencies, the third picks up the multiplied high frequency.
See the link below... specifically the 'mixer' section.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterodyne
I'm just piecing this together at this point... brain storming. Does anyone here have any heterodyne experience that can shed anymore light on this? Does this sound correct? Any other possibilities?
-
... ie the asymmetrical magnet on the inside, and bias on the outside...
I'd think that
1. )the internal magnet represents the magnet on the rotor,
2.) the ferrite core represents the non-linear mh curve, and you
3.) pump in an asymmetric current pulse (AC with return pulse stronger ) so you weakly attract the core and then blast it with a repulsion force. Exactly like cracking a whip.
We had all of the ingredients but I personally never saw anyone talk about non-linear PLUS asymmetrical.
In naudin's 2sGen the asymmetry may be provided by the falling current in the pickup coil causing backEMF into the core. If we had larger backEMF we'd probably have gone OU.
Where's the asymmetry in an eOrbo? The pulse timing I suppose?
-
I'd think that
1. )the internal magnet represents the magnet on the rotor,
2.) the ferrite core represents the non-linear mh curve, and you
3.) pump in an asymmetric current pulse (AC with return pulse stronger ) so you weakly attract the core and then blast it with a repulsion force. Exactly like cracking a whip.
We had all of the ingredients but I personally never saw anyone talk about non-linear PLUS asymmetrical.
In naudin's 2sGen the asymmetry may be provided by the falling current in the pickup coil causing backEMF into the core. If we had larger backEMF we'd probably have gone OU.
Where's the asymmetry in an eOrbo? The pulse timing I suppose?
The asymmetry in the eOrbo is the magnet leaving TDC. The magnet will turn the domains or offer more resistance depending on the direction of rotation or the polarity of the applied current to turn the domains (domain rotation) more on one side of the toroid core that is closest to the magnet as it moves away from TDC, than the other side of the core that is farther away from the magnet. This creates a non-linear M-H relationship within the core, due to its asymmetry of the rotation of the domains (one side of the core will be sitting on the linear portions of the M-H curve, while the other side is sitting on the non-linear portions of the M-H curve). This is the reason why the gap between the toroid and magnets is important.
Here's a flash presentation from the SKDB on the M-H curve and magnetic domains, http://www.steorn.com/skdb/e-learning/flash-promo/3.1/index.html You'll need to hit the play button more than one time (it's setup like a slide show).
According to Steorn, the ssOrbo gains energy via control of a material's inductance and domain rotation. We know that an external magnet can control the materials inductance. We just need to control the domain rotation as to create a non-linear M-H relationship within the toroid core (one side must be sitting on the linear portions and the other side need to be sitting on the non-linear portions of the M-H curve). This creates an asymmetry system of the magnetization within the core material. A higher permeable core can be magnetized easier.
M-H curve is just the relationship between the applied intensity of the magnetic field to the amount of magnetization of the material. In an asymmetry system, one side will be magnetized more than the other side, or one toroid will be magnetized more than another toroid. Luc's dual coil toroid, is magnetizing each half of the toroid in different directions, but each half is either sitting on the linear portions or the non-linear portions of the M-H curve. We need one half to sit on the linear portions, while the other half is sitting on the non-linear portion in order to make it an asymmetry system or to use more than one toroid.
If you look at the Lee Valstad coil I posted a few pages back, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg235742#msg235742 , you will notice there are 4 ends to the coil. 2 ends for each separate signal, in order to make it an asymmetric system.
I posted this information before Steorn announced the ssOrbo or released the publications on the asymmetry and the M-H curves. I've been saying the M-H Curve is important over the last 4 months. Finally, this has caught some attention. I first posted the Lee Valstad coil back in September of 2009, which can use more than one signal to create an asymmetric system.
GB
-
Just a few thoughts on the Steorn solid state orbo....
To me it looks like Steorn has three coils around a ferrite cylinder with a bias magnet in the middle. They probably have an external asymmetrical magnet on the outside. I could be wrong about the magnet placement... ie the asymmetrical magnet on the inside, and bias on the outside. I think they are using the three coils to perform heterodyne frequency multiplication with the non linear part of the M-H curve of the ferrite. Two coils input the two low frequencies, the third picks up the multiplied high frequency.
See the link below... specifically the 'mixer' section.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterodyne
I'm just piecing this together at this point... brain storming. Does anyone here have any heterodyne experience that can shed anymore light on this? Does this sound correct? Any other possibilities?
I really like this idea. I'm going to research it more. Thanks.
GB
-
@All,
Today I did build a little circuit that fits inside a 9V battery form factor.
The main idea was to get a high "radiant" voltage output for charging
lead acid batteries. The circuit gets a little hot at 9 volt input so if
anybody decide to build the circuit then use more turns on L1 and L2.
The 2,2nF ceramic capacitor is probably also too big so there is too much
feed back to the switching transistor. I did use small toroid cores so that
everything did fit inside a 9 volt battery plastic box. When the circuit is
run from 9 volt input the output is close to 60 volt. But as I said, the circuit
gets warm and this setup needs to be run from about 3 volt or so. More
testing is needed.
Groundloop.
-
@All,
Today I did build a little circuit that fits inside a 9V battery form factor.
The main idea was to get a high "radiant" voltage output for charging
lead acid batteries. The circuit gets a little hot at 9 volt input so if
anybody decide to build the circuit then use more turns on L1 and L2.
The 2,2nF ceramic capacitor is probably also too big so there is too much
feed back to the switching transistor. I did use small toroid cores so that
everything did fit inside a 9 volt battery plastic box. When the circuit is
run from 9 volt input the output is close to 60 volt. But as I said, the circuit
gets warm and this setup needs to be run from about 3 volt or so. More
testing is needed.
Groundloop.
I like it. This is a step in the right direction I think. Good job Groundloop.
Thanks,
GB
-
@gravityblock,
Thanks.
Working on the attached right now. Cap charge up to +85 volt
when the circuit runs on 9 volt.
GL.
-
Hi all
I'm playing with my CML2Sgen (when I have some time): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wm5uFUaLxg
made some measurements but it's not optimal configuration so... but what is important I've notice strange behaviour, you can notice on clip that when I'm connecting led other led gets brighter (usually should act differ)... Can someone explain it?
I'm working to use PC sound card as generator/oscilloscope because now I feel like blind man (only one meter)...
-
Good Work. I am particularly pleased with the scalability by virtue of simply adding magnets or increase magnetic potentials.
-
@All,
My SCR based charge controller did not work that well. The SCR
has a tendency to stay short circuit when it was triggered
because the input charge was high enough to keep the current
going through the SCR. So I have designed a new charge
controller based on a mosfet instead. The new circuit should
work like this: The neon bulb will start to light at 65 volt plus
the zener voltage. This will give 14,1 volt to the gate on the
mosfet and the mosfet will discharge the capacitor to the
load. To get a long discharge duration, I use a high Ohm
resistor on the gate so that the mosfet will stay on long
enough. I will build this circuit soon and test it.
(Edit) I have tested the attached circuit. The input voltage needs to be approx. 100 volt
for the circuit to work.
Groundloop.
-
I was just reading over Howard Johnsons' Spintronics The Secret World of Magnets which you will find available for download at http://www.scribd.com The effect you are describing is covered from a permanent magnet arrangement point of view in the section on the Gate. I found it a fascinating read. Your electromagnetic approach with respect to the ORBO Tech is worthy of pursuit.
-
From a permanent magnet motor perspective; if one were to arrange the curved magnets in the gate as described by Howard Johnson in Spintronics The Secret World of Magnets on say a rim and spaced properly with said rim freewheeling on an axlis maintained by a secondary stationary rim or non magnetic tubular design; one could conceivably have quite a generator of the ORBO type design. I believe a tube within a tube design would be most effective.
-
Upon further consideration; a half tue as the stationary track would be a preferred embodiment; with the pickup coils positioned along the perimiter of said track.
-
Good Evening ALL,
I am finally home from my travels, and should be able to test my SSG3 with my new Pulser Kit, this weekend....
I am curiose of the results! ;)
Cheers,
Bruce
-
I proposed a Toroid earlier with an output wrap and a stack of Neos spanning the middle with tiny aperture flux blocker coils embedded in each side of the toroid where the magnet poles meet the inner edges, designed to alternate the polarity magnetization of the core. Each pulse would pole reverse and demagnetize the core material. The important factor though, is that with a properly programed pulse, first a simultaneous twin flux blocker pulse would allow the material to demagnetize to the point of retentivity, followed by an off of the opposite polarity from the start charge, driving the material to the point of coercivity and zero magnetization. At this point both flux blocker coils would be recharged again to allow an output delay rest cycle, where the core material would have a chance to do it's electron reorganization work. Thence it would transform heat into electricity and generate demagnetization current in the output wrap. The same coil would again discharge and drive the material to the point of opposite saturation where the twin charge would again be applied, repeating the cycle. A complex circuit program like this could optimize output from this simple design. The B-H curve should work exactly backwards here, flux density should be in direct proportion to the coil field intensity.
-
@Bruce_TPU
Hi Bruce I think you're onto something important with the Aluminum.
Floyd Sweets VTA was constructed with an Aluminum box around the coils. Dr James Schwartz uses Aluminum sheet cut out around wound magnets (and Bismuth) in his ERR.
My best guess is it might introduce a flux reflection like a mirror by intercepting a rising flux.... turning it into an induced current & the resulting current flow in the Aluminum then produces it's own flux opposing the original flux. So the polarity is identical but the direction is reversed on rising fluxes.
When the incoming flux tries to reduce the polarity reverses producing an attraction flux opposite to the original flux.
This is easily seen in the various Youtube videos where they drop a big Neo onto a Copper or Aluminum plate. It falls in slow motion due to the incoming rising density flux.
However if the Neo is slid around close to the plate the plate tends to drag along underneath the Neo due to the falling flux.
So overall I believe there's a 90 degree phase shift in incoming to reflected flux occurs.
(When plotted one against the other, assuming the incident flux to be sinusoidal in nature).
-
Hello All,
Well I have just completed my first test with my new pulser, and no where near OU... but I learned a bit new.
First, the sweet spot seemed to be between 71 Hz 80 Hz. Above 112 Hz and the polarity of the current flips, and I have to reverse the inputs into my analog meter to get a correct reading.
As the frequency increases, the output voltage and current both decrease. I had hoped that increasing the frequency would increase the output current, but it did not happen, but actually the reversed.
At between 71 and 80 Hz, there is tremendous vibration in the toroids and unit. The SSG3 sounds like an airplane coming to power as the frequency increases.
I am powering the board with a 9 volt battery, and the main power in is my 12 volt 7aH battery.
This pulser uses far more power than my old set up.
A second test will be forthcoming in a few weeks. I have ordered a new prototype pulser and it is being built for me. I needed these pulser's anyway for future experiments, so it is all good.
I have learned a great deal building this. Steorn's approach is still the best...IHMO. I will leave the SSG3 built, until said new pulser arrives. It will go up to 300 KHz and requires much less power to operate.
Max power output was 5.5 volts at 4 microamps at 49.3% duty cycle.
Cheers, ;)
Bruce
-
Elagently simple design Groundloop. A suggestion with a cautionary note; would be to try an input pulse signal of the frequency of the earth EMF. Please do not physically come into contact with the device though.
-
@Energy4All,
What is the frequency of the earth?
Do you mean the Schumann resonances?
(Schumann resonances are the principal background in the
electromagnetic spectrum between 3–69 Hz, and appear as distinct
peaks at extremely low frequencies (ELF) around 7.83, 14.3, 20.8,
27.3 and 33.8Hz. The eighth overtone lies at approximately 59.9 Hz.)
What will happen if I physically come into contact with the device?
Thanks,
Groundloop.
-
Two aperture wraps one at ten and the other at the two O'clock position, and two output coils on each side of the Toroid, magnet stack down the center, duplicates Colonel Bearden's MEG to a T. His twin flux blocker coils were wired in parallel with the inside coil wraps connected to the negative and the outside wraps with the coil ends connected to the positive pole of the power source. A switch is wired on each end. A standard flip flop with a power pot should get the kind of results Bearden's MEG demonstrates, only the COP should be hundreds of times greater due to the great reduction in scale of the input coils. This works by directing the flux away from one half of the toroid at a time causing alternating cycles of demagnatization in the core material. Simple way for Bruce to put one of his extra circuits to work.
-
Hello Synchro1. I would start with the lowest frequency and work your way up on an experimental basis. If you run into a particularly strong magnetic frequency there I can only theorize that the device will pull your two permanent magnets into your output core and or allow for such an inrush of magnetic potential that it could result in a brief; but large current increase in the device. In theory what I am trying to get you to see is that you could tap the earth magnetic field if you view the device as a magnetic pump directly coupled with the earth magnetic field. This is just theory; but does pose questions and as yet unknown factors.
-
@Freezer,
You never got back to me on the PM so I decided to post the
circuit you asked for here. This circuit needs about 110 volt
input to work. The resistor value sets the trigger voltage.
If you use a lower resistor value the trigger will happen at
a lower input volt. I have not tested this circuit but I see no
reason it will not work as designed. You MUST use the TIC106
SCR because other SCRs have a too high trigger current.
Groundloop.
-
Hello Synchro1. I would start with the A frequency and work your way up on an experimental basis. If you run into a particularly strong magnetic frequency there I can only theorize that the device will pull your two permanent magnets into your output core and or allow for such an inrush of magnetic potential that it could result in a brief; but large current increase in the device. In theory what I am trying to get you to see is that you could tap the earth magnetic field if you view the device as a magnetic pump directly coupled with the earth magnetic field. This is just theory; but does pose questions and as yet unknown factors.
Absolutely, the work of Tesla's first patent for the spark gap generator! The problem is it's hard to fit the ground mechanism aboard a flying saucer. One can get demagnetization over unity from running pulsed D.C. backwards through an ordinary 120 volt to 3 volt AC to DC transformer. Lidmotor has several good videos where he stores the backwards transformer feedback into a cap and runs a pulse motor with the generated power.
-
Hello Syncro1 I am familiar with Lidmotors work. I subscribe to his chanel. On that note transceivers such as those Dr. Stiffler employs in his SEC technology are probablt all you will need to feed the system. Tesla transceivers with the copper ball on top will work fine.
-
Here's a picture of a racetrack Nanoperm core and a Hyperlink to the distributor. The all or none switch characteristic of magnetic flux, and the tiny amount of additional reluctance needed to prejudice the path of least reluctance exclusively to one or the other race track paths, makes the minimal aperture wrap very efficient. This race track nanoperm core looks enticingly similar to Colonel Beardens costly and cumbersome Honeywell core. Just think of the input savings with a microscopic flux blocker wrap over Beardens design!
http://www.powermagnetics.co.uk/nanoperm.html (http://www.powermagnetics.co.uk/nanoperm.html)
-
Hello Groundloop. You asked what would happen if you came in contact with the device. The aswer is nothing good. Similar to the Mark Stevens Device contact. Directly related to employing the Earth Magnetic Field; doing so left Hendershot paralyzed and in a wheel chair. For a real world example go to http://www.scribd.com and search for and download and read "The Hendershot Mystery". He directly coupled with the earth EMF and employed it as I am describing the possibility.
-
Just Theory. I find it difficult to think that Tesla had miscalculated the energy transmission levels in the wireless transmission system at Warrencliff etc; but I do find it plausible that he had not counted on a direct coupling with the earth EMF and the additional energy input into the system which resulted in the "Tunguska" event. That said do apply approriate caution if you decide to pursue the direct coupling method of the earth EMF as a source of energy to be employed.
-
@Energy4All,
Thanks for the document link, I will take a look.
Groundloop.
-
No problem Groundloop. Enjoy.
-
@Energy4All,
Snip from the "The_Hendershot_Mystery.pdf" document:
"Since Skilling's original article appeared in Round Robin in 1962, there has
been probably many thousands of researchers around the world who have
attempted to recreate the Mark III device, but alas, no one has ever proven
publicly that they could produce useable output from the information
provided. Even Mark Hendershot, with his inside knowledge of his father's
inventions, has not been unable to achieve his father's success. Evidently,
Lester Hendershot possessed some skill or knowledge of the device that
was not passed on for posterity."
End snip.
I think it will almost impossible to replicate his circuits.
Groundloop.
-
I am certain no one who has successfully replicated the Mark 3 has come forward as yet. The Mark one shold be easily replicated; and theoreticaly the circuit of the Mark 3 could be redisigned to incorporate the advances in electronics since the 50s and 60s; but the secret may well have gone to the grave with Lester for a while.
-
Hi Folks,
There is another book: The_Hendeshot_motor_mystery.pdf in this Russian thread here, freely downloadable from the first post, (the book is in English):
http://www.001-lab.com/001lab/index.php?topic=143.0
Sorry if this was already known by you.
Gyula
-
Thank you Gyulasun. I'll look it over and see if it is any more revealing than the version I have already covered. I believe I already understand how the motor works; but I always investigate other documents on such obscurred devices.
-
@Bruce_TPU
Hi Bruce I think you're onto something important with the Aluminum.
Floyd Sweets VTA was constructed with an Aluminum box around the coils. Dr James Schwartz uses Aluminum sheet cut out around wound magnets (and Bismuth) in his ERR.
My best guess is it might introduce a flux reflection like a mirror by intercepting a rising flux.... turning it into an induced current & the resulting current flow in the Aluminum then produces it's own flux opposing the original flux. So the polarity is identical but the direction is reversed on rising fluxes.
When the incoming flux tries to reduce the polarity reverses producing an attraction flux opposite to the original flux.
This is easily seen in the various Youtube videos where they drop a big Neo onto a Copper or Aluminum plate. It falls in slow motion due to the incoming rising density flux.
However if the Neo is slid around close to the plate the plate tends to drag along underneath the Neo due to the falling flux.
So overall I believe there's a 90 degree phase shift in incoming to reflected flux occurs.
(When plotted one against the other, assuming the incident flux to be sinusoidal in nature).
For what it's worth there is also the Boyd Bushman experiement where he levitates a by putting 110 V through a coil that sits on top of an Al plate. Only works with the plate tho.
-
In most of the cases, like in Boyd Bushman coil levitation over an Alu plate, eddy currents are induced in the metal and the flux created by those currents works against the flux of the coil current.
Eddy current heats the metal bodies in which they flow.
Just found an interesting book on its effect on non ferromagnetic metals:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30473500/Non-Ferrous-Magnet
rgds, Gyula
-
In most of the cases, like in Boyd Bushman coil levitation over an Alu plate, eddy currents are induced in the metal and the flux created by those currents works against the flux of the coil current.
Eddy current heats the metal bodies in which they flow.
Just found an interesting book on its effect on non ferromagnetic metals:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30473500/Non-Ferrous-Magnet
rgds, Gyula
nice ...
same user from chadj1060's Documents:
http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/5980480-chadj1060
Seike Ultrarelativity
Advanced Energetics II
and GB Patent application 2130431
Method and means for producing perpetual motion with high power
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27845874/GB-Patent-2130431
try to find it in internet ...
-
Hello Wings check with Ash over at Panacea BOACF he posted a link to this patent. If you can't find it I believe I have it saved as a doc.
-
Could it be that aluminum can slow down the field collapse which would enable more time to absorb more of it?
Mags
-
Could it be that aluminum can slow down the field collapse which would enable more time to absorb more of it?
Mags
I think if an Alu surface is present in or near to a collapsing flux field, eddy current is induced in the Alu, you get a counter flux from the induced current to oppose the original flux (Lenz law). It is possible this process slows down the original flux speed but then it consumes from it too.
Alu is paramagnetic, its relative permeability ur=1.000022
What Smoky described above, it sounds to me also eddy current effect.
rgds, Gyula
-
Here's a direct link for patent GB2130431 "Method and means for producing perpetual motion with high power" by KALFAIAN MEGUER VARTAN.
http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=2130431A&KC=A&FT=D&date=19840531&DB=&locale= (http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=2130431A&KC=A&FT=D&date=19840531&DB=&locale=)
tak
-
Interesting patent grant on a perpetual motion device. It even looks fairly easy to build if I understand it correctly. It mentions usable high power. Hmm......
-
Indeed it does E2Matrix. As an aside. Having read over this patent and understanding the mechanics involved I am impressed with the Fractal Mathmatics aspect of this device with respect to a macrocosmic version IE: our own solar system. I did ask the Alpha Institute for Advanced Study to analyze this device. I do not know if they will as they never responded to my request.
-
Interesting patent grant on a perpetual motion device.
Its not a grant; its an application. And with a priority date of 1983, it must be out of date.
Interesting.
-
I heard that about a dozen SS orbos are being built and tested.
Some engineers have started a new blog to blog the progress here :
http://www.iol.ie/~inscc/My_Orbo_Blog/Welcome.html
http://www.iol.ie/~inscc/My_Orbo_Blog/Blog/Blog.html
These guys must be familiar to many posters here.
You may get some info in pieces, like the ssorbo has 3 solenoids and 1 toroid and uses rotating magnetic fields. He said he will publish the results.
-
@All,
Do you remember the Radiant Voltage Amplifier from page 43 in this thread?
I have decided to make a scaled up version of that circuit. Attached is the
design and build so far.
Part List:
T1 = NTE2354
C1 = 2,2uF 630V MKP
D3,D4,D5,D6 = KBU1004
R1 = 10K 5W
D7 = BAW62
RG1 = L78S10CV
C2 = 100uF 16V
C3 = 1000uF 63V
SW1 = ON/OFF
D1,D2 = BYV29-500
Fr1, Fr2 = 2 x "C" Ferrite Cores with 2 x I beams.
L1,L2 = 200 Turn 0,7mm Cu.
L3,L4 = 80 Turn 0,7mm Cu.
L5(L6) = 80 Turn 0,7mm Cu.
Coils done! Next is connecting coils to board and then first test run.
Groundloop.
-
@All,
OK, now I got the circuit up and running for the first time.
I'm running from a 9V NiMeh battery first just to be sure
that everything is working before trying out on a lead acid battery.
The 9 volt battery holds 8,4 volt and the AUX AC output was 12,5 Volt.
The next job is to make sure I got the polarity of the L3/L4 coils
correct. Then I will be ready to test on a lead acid battery.
Groundloop.
-
Groundloop, Very nice build! To clarify for myself are there ferrite 'I' beams going between the 2 toroids? In the schematic I'm also not clear on the 'U-' and 'U+' connections. Are those just other battery input points? Anything interesting in the output?
-
@e2matrix,
The cores is like in the attached drawing.
The Ferrite cores is explained in the attached pdf document.
I have used PVC tape to keep things together.
The +Ub and -Ub goes to the input battery that drives the circuit.
Output is from the L6(AUX) coil.
I'm currently measuring and testing the circuit so is it too early
to say anything about the circuit performance.
Groundloop.
-
Thanks GL. In a way it almost is like having 2 toroids side by side as you show in the schematic I think but much easier to wind.
-
@e2matrix,
Yes, when you use an air gap between the two "C" cores then
you get almost the same result as using two toroids. I have used
a 10mm air gap. Toroids are a pain in the as$ to wind. :-)
Groundloop.
-
Show me one working reproduction of an 'Orbo.' You can't. Four years later, makes no sense. Has to be a scam.
-
@happyfunball,
Please post your rants in the other Steorn thread. This
thread is for solid state research.
Moderator.
-
@happyfunball,
Please post your rants in the other Steorn thread. This
thread is for solid state research.
Moderator.
Has anything been gained from 4 years of watching Steorn claim to have free energy technology? We're all hopeful it's just very frustrating.
-
@happyfunball,
Free energy research in general is very frustrating because there
is very few circuits that produce useful output power.
But I wont go as far as say it is hopeless. I think many people in this
free energy forum is doing a great job of researching free energy.
If we stop that research then all hope is lost. I think it is important
that people at least TRY to solve the energy problem. If nobody
try then how can we ever get rid of the oil dependency?
Steorn is doing their part, I'm doing my part, other people is
doing their part. Together that's a lot of research. I do not think
that all this research is futile. BTW: Steorn has started to dish
out licences to the Orbo systems and replications are in the
making as we speak.
Groundloop.
-
@happyfunball,
Free energy research in general is very frustrating because there
is very few circuits that produce useful output power.
But I wont go as far as say it is hopeless. I think many people in this
free energy forum is doing a great job of researching free energy.
If we stop that research then all hope is lost. I think it is important
that people at least TRY to solve the energy problem. If nobody
try then how can we ever get rid of the oil dependency?
Steorn is doing their part, I'm doing my part, other people is
doing their part. Together that's a lot of research. I do not think
that all this research is futile. BTW: Steorn has started to dish
out licences to the Orbo systems and replications are in the
making as we speak.
Groundloop.
Fair enough.
What's this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sqmq9i-tos&playnext_from=TL&videos=0iQnr9g7Zk0
-
Fair enough.
What's this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sqmq9i-tos&playnext_from=TL&videos=0iQnr9g7Zk0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sqmq9i-tos&playnext_from=TL&videos=0iQnr9g7Zk0)
it is an other thread :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7987.msg198690#msg198690 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7987.msg198690#msg198690)
-
it is an other thread :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7987.msg198690#msg198690 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7987.msg198690#msg198690)
Thanks
-
Hi , all
did you read the Thane 's patent ?
espacenet — Mosaics (http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=CA&NR=2594905A1&KC=A1&FT=D&date=20090118&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
all the ssorbo is explained
-
Free Energy research in general is very frustrating because there
is very few circuits that produce useful output power.
Which are those circuit if I may ask?
I haven't seen a single circuit that produce anything but underunity!!!
Can I ask you nicely to post a link to one of those "few circuits" that
produce useful output power, in this case meaning overunity...
-
Which are those circuit if I may ask?
I haven't seen a single circuit that produce anything but underunity!!!
Can I ask you nicely to post a link to one of those "few circuits" that
produce useful output power, in this case meaning overunity...
I agree - not single one. At least not single one that we can be 100% sure is not a scam.
-
@tagor,
Thanks for the patent link.
Groundloop.
-
The cores is like in the attached drawing.
The Ferrite cores is explained in the attached pdf document.
I have used PVC tape to keep things together.
The +Ub and -Ub goes to the input battery that drives the circuit.
Output is from the L6(AUX) coil.
I'm currently measuring and testing the circuit so is it too early
to say anything about the circuit performance.
Groundloop.
Groundloop
Can you tell me where you bought your C cores?
I'd like to start/catch up on your replication.
Thanks
Don
-
@dllabarre,
I get most of my electronics from www.elfa.se
Core U beam = order number 58-633-03
Core I beam = order number 58-633-11
Groundloop.
-
@All,
Do you remember the Radiant Voltage from page 43 in this thread?
I have decided to make a scaled up version of that circuit. Attached is the
design and build so far.
Part List:
T1 = NTE2354
C1 = 2,2uF 630V MKP
D3,D4,D5,D6 = KBU1004
R1 = 10K 5W
D7 = BAW62
RG1 = L78S10CV
C2 = 100uF 16V
C3 = 1000uF 63V
SW1 = ON/OFF
D1,D2 = BYV29-500
Fr1, Fr2 = 2 x "C" Ferrite Cores with 2 x I beams.
L1,L2 = 200 Turn 0,7mm Cu.
L3,L4 = 80 Turn 0,7mm Cu.
L5(L6) = 80 Turn 0,7mm Cu.
Coils done! Next is connecting coils to board and then first test run.
Groundloop.
I'm putting together my order and I see 2 transistors on heat sinks and 2 not on heat sinks but I only see the NTE2354 in the parts list.
Am I confusing what looks like transistors in your picture as something else?
Thanks for clarifying
Don
-
@dllabarre,
The BYV29-500 is in a TO-220 housing.
Groundloop.
-
@dllabarre,
The BYV29-500 is in a TO-220 .
Groundloop.
Thank you for clarifying. :)
I ordered my C I cores. The specifications are very similar to your specs.
Don
-
Hi everyone
I registered here and at another forum 2-3 years ago, But has been a seldom guest here.
If I remember right this is my first post here.
Now I have skimmed this thread, and lots of thanks to many members sharing their knowledge. :)
Less thanks to the naysayers, I simply don't understand the purpose of most of these posts (speculative naysayers), except wasting the time of other members. >:(
But now I got through the posts and got it off my chest.
I have done a few experiments on these effects being the subject of this thread.
Let me begin saying I have visited Steorn before the 1st of april, and the announcement of the SS Orbo at this time was due to Seans humour.
Let me also say I have not so far seen the SS Orbo presented at Steorn directly in this thread.
---------
What I have experimented are some a very basic setups, just a magnet, a toroid and a coil.
The magnet is a neo 25mm diameter 15 mm high N52, and the toroid core is 2 cores sanded on one side and glued together to form a OD 25mm, ID 15mm, length 20mm. The coil used is close to Brooks coil dimensions ID 29 mm OD 48 mm, length 7.5mm filled with 0.2 mm Cu magnet wire.
I found best results with no core in the coil.
Having the magnet flat on the table, the toroid upon the magnet with horizontal centerline and the coil touching the the toroid with approx. 120 degree angle between the centerline of the magnet and the coil.
For the first experiments i used some nanoperm toroid I got from Sean, but I did not like the conductive metal foil in the cores, as it heat a lot at higher frequencies due to losses in the core material.
So the core I used then was as mentioned in a N30 material approx mu value of 5000. I do not consider this optimal, but the main purpose for me was testing the effect, and see how I could harvest the energy.
To exite the toroid I use my uController + a supply and power/signal distributer PCB + a number of insulated MOSFET or IGBT PCBs up to 800V sustained and of own design. These PCBs can operate up to 500kHz. The toroid is sitting between 2 switches like the coil in a window motor.
Sean was talking current, while I want voltage (at least as a first step).
I have studied Hector's writings, and this is the reason for the experimental set I have made. The uController has 7 PWM outputs, which I can use to control the transistor frequency, phase and pulse widths.
If I load the coil with a resistor I get almost nothing, just some spikes.
According to Hector I should use a LC tank circuit at resonance to transform the energy, and that is another ballgame. I have had a 12V 4W bulb lit to full brightness using a simple adapter transformer for impedance matching, The loaded sine was 200V rms.
The next step was to use Hectors diode plug to harvest the energy non-reflective to the load, thus not detuning the LC circuit when harvesting the energy.
This enabled me to light a 220V 15W bulb approx 1/3 lit.
The COP is terrible, as this core material is not suited well. I think e.g. a T38 core material will perform better. On the plus side is the option of recovering the energy from the toroid. Doing that a battery is kicked hard and charging well. I have not measured how much I recover.
But aiming for electrical output the COP is of no concern so far, I can just say that Hectors teachings once again is no BS, it works as he says, so the countless hours working through his non standard terminology writings has been rewarded. Frequency and precise pulse width is very important.
So now I "just" need a more efficient way to gate the field from the neo.
Here I want to thank lumen for post #118 on page 13. :)
I think this has a lot of potential.
As I see it, the field in the magnets and the loop around circuit does not vary much.
The strength of the magnets is set so the "8-toroid" is near saturation.
The gain mechanism is the control coils only enclosing a part of the core. Energizing the control coil saturates the core inside the coil. This results in a saturation of the remaining core, because the "effective core area" is reduced. I also suspect this effect to be much more fast than the transistor operated control coil.
So next is to get some cores to test this hopefully more efficient gating.
I'm not ready to release the PCBs yet. I have also done some Tesla switch experiments, and something weird happens. I have seen 8kV/us gradients, and activated but not resettable protection circuits. After a power down they work OK again. This has to be investigated more. It has even cost me 2 smoked high quality MOSFETs, all 3 pins fully shorted.
The power for the control comes from a net adapter. The MOSFETs and IGBTs are just acting as switches well insulated from the control circuit.
Eric
-
Loaded the same picture twice, here is the second picture.
Eric
-
Here is the diagram, I compressed it so much I could preserving readability, but it is still a bit wide.
I'm working on designing a new controller board able to control up to 16 ISPS (Insulated Simple Power Switches) with 8ns time signal resolution, take input from a quadrature encoder with index pulses for pulse motor applications (up to 8MHz encoder frequency), and maybe also have 3 DDS ICs (no individual drift, as operating from a single crystal).
With this new board I will be able to implement SMPS low and high voltage, rpm and torque control, closed regulator loop for voltage and current regulation and limiting for many different experiments.
I started on this road to get a "LEGO brick" set, being generic and reconfigurable for new experiments.
Eric
-
Solid State Orbo System - not so solid ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsQkJGUr6FI
my latest motor based on ss . I'm very happy with result (very simple electric tiger) spinning and produce energy ...
I know that maybe it should be in orbo motor section but you can treat moving part as generator if you wish ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh2zjxwyyZ4 one more
-
"When they send out some of these boards to SKDB members, we will find independent verification all over the world. Anyone with an oscilloscope and some voltage and current probes can measure this."
http://hdeasy.blogspot.com/
-
"When they send out some of these boards to SKDB members, we will find independent verification all over the world. Anyone with an oscilloscope and some voltage and current probes can measure this."
http://hdeasy.blogspot.com/
Don't forget you need a €419/year license...
(only for personal use, commercialization not allowed)
It's time Steorn shows us prototypes instead of interviews.
(although they don't owe us anything, of course)
-
Don't forget you need a €419/year license...
(only for personal use, commercialization not allowed)
It's time Steorn shows us prototypes instead of interviews.
(although they don't owe us anything, of course)
I agree. I might consider the €419/year license fee however I would require a gaurantee that the information given can enable - under resonable conditions - replication of an overunity device. Otherwise what's the point? I for one have tired of claims on devices which when multiple independent people have built to spec amount to nothing (ahem M.E.G). And no...saying "Naudin replicated it and 'a few others'" doesn't cut it. Where is the proof?
A question to anyone who IS a member of the Steorn SKDB - is the information provided enough to replicate an overunity device?
-
TOTALLY agree with you NTesla
as for the "MEG" .......1 word will siffice....and that word is..... pfffffft
-
...
It's time Steorn shows us prototypes instead of interviews. (although they don't owe us anything, of course)
...I for one have tired of claims on devices which when multiple independent people have built to spec amount to nothing (ahem M.E.G). And no...saying "Naudin replicated it and 'a few others'" doesn't cut it. Where is the proof?
...
Hi. I agree with you both. Imho Steorn would not have to let us pay a €419/year license if they have really something: they could just give all the information to build their device and successful replications worldwide would give them back fame and credibility, and therefore money from investors wanting to exploit their patents.
-
Hi. I agree with you both. Imho Steorn would not have to let us pay a €419/year license if they have really something: they could just give all the information to build their device and successful replications worldwide would give them back fame and credibility, and therefore money from investors wanting to exploit their patents.
Yup. Like others, I don't really understand their strategy to have developers pay money to get the technology details to develop commercial products.
In the end they can ask license fees for commercial products.
If they really have something, this is where their major income will be generated.
Not from the small pocket money they ask for development licenses.
Now they have set up a hurdle for the individual developers, which will hamper product introductions.
Maybe they are afraid that the real trick is too simple and that there will be a lot of implementers that will build a device for private use and therefore not buy commercial implementations. In such case Steorn won't get license fees of many devices.
Also, I haven't seen the real patent(s) that will be licensed.
What else would they want to license, if there are no patents? The only thing I can think of is logo or brand name, which is out of the question here.
Unique designs could be protected and licensed, but if I can improve such design, that will not be protected by the original protected design.
An other possibility is that they have patents pending. Question is whether they will be granted.
This license program is all quite misty, which affects their credibility.
-
...
Maybe they are afraid that the real trick is too simple and that there will be a lot of implementers that will build a device for private use and therefore not buy commercial implementations. In such case Steorn won't get license fees of many devices.
...
It is unlikely. Even if their trick was very simple and 100% of experimenters here could replicate their device, only a very small percentage of the general population would be able to do the same. In any case, mass products are often cheaper than what we would have to pay for building them ourself, and we save time, so we are ready to buy.
We must also reckon that what is needed for a mean household is at least a 7-10Kw electricity source for ordinary use, or 30-50KW if the heating/cooling is also included. Building one is not as simple as a small "proof of concept" device.
And last point, if such a free cheap electricity source existed, then all new products from the market will have their integrated power supply. A TV or a radiator will be sold "power supply inside". We are all bothered with cables. So the whole industry will have to pay license fees.
-
Will this be the proof we all eagerly are waiting for?
http://www.freeenergytimes.com/?p=456
-
Will this be the proof we all eagerly are waiting for?
http://www.freeenergytimes.com/?p=456
That's a step in the right direction - if lots of people can get their hands on these units then we should be able to independently verify Steorn's claims.
-
I'll just say this, knowing I will not purchase an SDK, or developer license from them. If they can produce OU, it will be from the discovery (and exploitation) of a new physical law of our universe. They didnt create the law. The universe did. That law does not belong to them. And the mere understanding of this law will allow many different methods of extracting useful power. All hypothetical.
If I had access to this kit. And I was able to verify that it does indeed result in more power out than in, the first thing I would do is plaster the details of the principle all over the web, as long and as often as I could, until someone stopped me.
Such a discovery is so important to HUMANITY (read: screw your bank account), to not divulge everything immediately is sick and twisted. How many millions of people have died due to wars over energy control, or due to not having energy to heat their homes, or to <fill in the blank>.
Sometimes(possibly all the time) I hate our commercialized world. I have to believe that SOMEONE who has access to this information feels the same way. I would give my life in order for the world to be free of our energy dependence. I'm so tired of hearing about "people should be compensated", and patent this, non-disclosure that. People need to think bigger, this is much bigger than our own individual lives.
-
@ void109
100% agreed! *clap*
-
I'll just say this, knowing I will not purchase an SDK, or developer license from them. If they can produce OU, it will be from the discovery (and exploitation) of a new physical law of our universe. They didnt create the law. The universe did. That law does not belong to them. And the mere understanding of this law will allow many different methods of extracting useful power. All hypothetical.
If I had access to this kit. And I was able to verify that it does indeed result in more power out than in, the first thing I would do is plaster the details of the principle all over the web, as long and as often as I could, until someone stopped me.
Such a discovery is so important to HUMANITY (read: screw your bank account), to not divulge everything immediately is sick and twisted. How many millions of people have died due to wars over energy control, or due to not having energy to heat their homes, or to <fill in the blank>.
Sometimes(possibly all the time) I hate our commercialized world. I have to believe that SOMEONE who has access to this information feels the same way. I would give my life in order for the world to be free of our energy dependence. I'm so tired of hearing about "people should be compensated", and patent this, non-disclosure that. People need to think bigger, this is much bigger than our own individual lives.
Here! Here! Unfortunately the pyschopaths controlling this world don't share your view point. It's about money, power and control to them. Nothing more, nothing less.
-
Here are the official links:
http://www.steorn.com/skdb/oedu/
http://www.steorn.com/images/orbo-evaluation-and-development-unit-brochure.pdf
-
Speaking of the principal behind the Steorn OU claim, does anyone even know exactly how it works?
I was doing some testing on toroidal coils, and they have very high inductance. If they are cut in half the inductance drops severely and is not even close to the same inductance as a full toroid even with twice the windings.
So saturating a small area of the core achieves the same drop in inductance as cutting the core.
The energy required to saturate a small area of the core to reduce the inductance of the entire core may be far less than the energy returned if a small current was applied to the windings just before releasing the small saturated area.
The increased total inductance would return far more than the initial spot saturation energy and the initial full core winding pumping.
The spot saturation could be supplied from another winding or a small moving neodymium magnet.
I'm totally not sure if this is Steorn's concept, it's the only thing I can see working at this point.
Anyone have other ideas?
-
Perhaps sometime in the future, someone will post the schematic.
Brilliant marketing by Steorn btw. They know only those that believe (or are optimistic about its potential) will join and/or pay for the development kit. They also know that these folks are less likely to openly question the claims. The prior quasi-public demo/release of the Orbo motor tests was a resounding failure, and it would appear they've learned not to repeat that fiasco. It was a damage-control nightmare for them, so they are now keeping things "under wraps" so to speak. Not a single bit of info publicly-released on the SS Orbo that I am aware of.
They talk about input and output measurements in this new brochure, yet anyone that followed the last Orbo motor debacle knows Steorn is prone to setup and measurement errors. It would not be unreasonable to presume that they have repeated these errors with this new SS Orbo and the associated development kit.
Out of curiosity, does one have to be a member and sign the NDA in order to buy the kit? (I would presume so, but I did not investigate this).
.99
-
Out of curiosity, does one have to be a member and sign the NDA in order to buy the kit? (I would presume so, but I did not investigate this).
.99
The fee for the kit includes SKDB membership. This would also entail the requisite NDA. This sort of begs the question that for those who paid the full, higher fee previously will they be able to acquire the kits gratis or at some reduced price to compensate.
-
Steorn would never agree to this, but I would buy their kit/membership and sign the NDA with the added terms:
1) If the measurements are properly obtained and they match their claims (assuming they are claiming OU), I then continue to abide by the NDA,
2) If the measurements clearly indicate COP<1 and they can not point to the flaw in my measurements, then my NDA with them is null and void.
.99
-
Speaking of the principal behind the Steorn OU claim, does anyone even know exactly how it works?
I was doing some testing on toroidal coils, and they have very high inductance. If they are cut in half the inductance drops severely and is not even close to the same inductance as a full toroid even with twice the windings.
So saturating a small area of the core achieves the same drop in inductance as cutting the core.
The energy required to saturate a small area of the core to reduce the inductance of the entire core may be far less than the energy returned if a small current was applied to the windings just before releasing the small saturated area.
The increased total inductance would return far more than the initial spot saturation energy and the initial full core winding pumping.
The spot saturation could be supplied from another winding or a small moving neodymium magnet.
I'm totally not sure if this is Steorn's concept, it's the only thing I can see working at this point.
Anyone have other ideas?
interesting.
you are continuing the experiment of this forum Self running coil? :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg235321#msg235321
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8BehANEVUo
-
interesting.
you are continuing the experiment of this forum Self running coil? :
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg235321#msg235321
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8BehANEVUo
I agree! Thank you for pointing out that thread.
I just watched the video, and my description does match the results in the video. The only thing that is missing in the video is why there is an increase in output. I believe what they may be missing is that the magnets jump away from the coil slightly when the current is applied to the coil and the attraction is reduced. This micro movement allows the coil to collapse with greater inductance and return more energy. After the collapse, the magnets pull tighter to the core once again, reducing the inductance for the next cycle.
-
I'll just say this, knowing I will not purchase an SDK, or developer license from them. If they can produce OU, it will be from the discovery (and exploitation) of a new physical law of our universe. They didnt create the law. The universe did. That law does not belong to them. And the mere understanding of this law will allow many different methods of extracting useful power. All hypothetical.
If I had access to this kit. And I was able to verify that it does indeed result in more power out than in, the first thing I would do is plaster the details of the principle all over the web, as long and as often as I could, until someone stopped me.
Such a discovery is so important to HUMANITY (read: screw your bank account), to not divulge everything immediately is sick and twisted.
...
Hi void109,
I agree 100%. I'd do the same thing (if Steorn had really something, but I think they sell wind).
-
I agree! Thank you for pointing out that thread.
I just watched the video, and my description does match the results in the video. The only thing that is missing in the video is why there is an increase in output. I believe what they may be missing is that the magnets jump away from the coil slightly when the current is applied to the coil and the attraction is reduced. This micro movement allows the coil to collapse with greater inductance and return more energy. After the collapse, the magnets pull tighter to the core once again, reducing the inductance for the next cycle.
???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PaulLowrance
-
...
The energy required to saturate a small area of the core to reduce the inductance of the entire core may be far less than the energy returned if a small current was applied to the windings just before releasing the small saturated area.
...
This statement is verified neither by measurements nor by a theoritical analysis.
A ferrite is saturated only along the saturating field (a toroid coil saturated by a well balanced transverse field keeps the same inductance). This means that the saturating field must have components that superpose to the field that we want control. Therefore the sources of the two fields are coupled and interact on each other. The work done to control the direction of the magnetic domains by the saturating field opposes the work done by the controled field, the laws of conservation (momentum, energy) and Lenz law still apply.
-
This statement is verified neither by measurements nor by a theoritical analysis.
A ferrite is saturated only along the saturating field (a toroid coil saturated by a well balanced transverse field keeps the same inductance). This means that the saturating field must have components that superpose to the field that we want control. Therefore the sources of the two fields are coupled and interact on each other. The work done to control the direction of the magnetic domains by the saturating field opposes the work done by the controled field, the laws of conservation (momentum, energy) and Lenz law still apply.
You may be entirely correct, however, using a permanent magnet to cause the spot saturation does not require any energy. The magnet self attracts to the core and takes less energy to remove it from the core because of the same reason you have stated above.
After winding a toroid to 15H and taking another toroid and cutting it in half, then winding over twice the windings on the same core material only to find it tests about 10mH, it seems the toroid is self reinforcing the field.
Using a small magnet to saturate a small part of the toroid appears to cause the same action as removing a section or opening the toroid. This causes the 15H toroid to drop to about 200mH.
I am still looking for any significance in this effect or a way it could be used for any advantage.
-
You may be entirely correct, however, using a permanent magnet to cause the spot saturation does not require any energy.
...
but removing the saturation requires energy.
It is the same old reason why we have not yet seen a working PMM. The energy provided or required by the motion of a permanent magnet relative to a ferromagnetic object is the same as the work provided or required by a mass going up or down in a gravitational field, question of potential energy depending on the object position relative to the source of the field.
-
...
Using a small magnet to saturate a small part of the toroid appears to cause the same action as removing a section or opening the toroid. This causes the 15H toroid to drop to about 200mH.
...
When a toroid is saturated and the saturation produces an effect on the inductance, the phenomenon of induction is also working: the changing saturating field induces an emf in the coil, even if the coil is a toroid (because the toroid in no more balanced, it is no more magnetically toroidal due to irregular permeability along it).
Then Lenz law applies as well as coupling with possible other external coils or magnets.
-
A new public demo is scheduled this week-end:
http://www.innovationdublin.ie/index.php/festival-2010-events/solid_state_orbo_demonstration/
Still keeping an open mind. Nevertheless I hope it will be more convincing than the previous demos, where no evidence but specious measurement protocols were given.
-
No live video this time unfortunately :( Somebody going for a live show to Dublin ?
-
Well, what was presented at that public demo that was announced above ?
-
Hi everyone,
I looked for solid state device and i found j naudin page and also at overunity this topic that interest me a lot. I got one simple question, at first page of topic is shown a ferrite coil that uses 0,4 mm copper wire. As i look closer to the picture is it bifilar wound?
Topper
-
Topper,
The two end coils is made out of several strands of enameled copper wire
because I needed thicker wire and did not have that.
Groundloop.
-
Hi,
Thanks Groundloop for reply:).
So this tube toroid coil can be onefilar coil with 0,4 mm wire?.
What resistance of coil do you advice or just to make as much windings as possible at coil?
Topper
-
Hi Topper,
I did use 4 wires in parallel 0,2 mm enameled copper wire. Did put as many
turns as I could onto the cores, approx. 90 turns, if I remember correct. So if
you use 0,8mm enameled copper wire you will have the same approx.
coil. Have fun. :-)
GL.
-
another product from steorn the HephaHeat
http://pesn.com/2011/11/08/9601951_Steorn_Announces_HephaHeat_Oveurnity_Technology/ (http://pesn.com/2011/11/08/9601951_Steorn_Announces_HephaHeat_Oveurnity_Technology/)
Hi Topper,
I did use 4 wires in parallel 0,2 mm enameled copper wire. Did put as many
turns as I could onto the cores, approx. 90 turns, if I remember correct. So if
you use 0,8mm enameled copper wire you will have the same approx.
coil. Have fun. :-)
GL.
-
now there is a lot of devices that gets real overunity !
this is an evidence that you are wrong
This statement is verified neither by measurements nor by a theoritical analysis.
A ferrite is saturated only along the saturating field (a toroid coil saturated by a well balanced transverse field keeps the same inductance). This means that the saturating field must have components that superpose to the field that we want control. Therefore the sources of the two fields are coupled and interact on each other. The work done to control the direction of the magnetic domains by the saturating field opposes the work done by the controled field, the laws of conservation (momentum, energy) and Lenz law still apply.
-
another product from steorn the HephaHeat
http://pesn.com/2011/11/08/9601951_Steorn_Announces_HephaHeat_Oveurnity_Technology/ (http://pesn.com/2011/11/08/9601951_Steorn_Announces_HephaHeat_Oveurnity_Technology/)
Tagor,
That was good news. Thanks for the link.
GL.
-
Why did this thread die?
No post for a year!
-
Why did this thread die?
No post for a year!
because orbo is absolutely secret until now
-
Or... more correctly... because NO PROOF has ever been given that the claims of excess energy production from an Orbo... of any kind.... are true.
All that's been forthcoming from Steorn is more delays, less definite claims, and a water heater using a huge thermal mass to heat a small quantity of water. Where is the self-running magnet motor they pretended to show at Kinetica all those years ago? Haven't they been able to fix their bearings YET? Where is the self-battery-charger Orbo that they pretended to exhibit at Waterways? They showed us the scopeshots that they said "proved" overunity performance.... and I fully duplicated that performance, producing the negatively accumulating energy integral just as they did. I even showed something they did NOT show: usable power generated by a generator coil, not shorted, on the device. And I also showed that these things do NOT prove overunity for their device.
The "solid state" orbo systems that they allegedly produced and distributed... incomplete.... to their SKDB never worked as they claimed, or at least nobody of their SKDB membership ever reported attaining any kind of self-powered system using that device. And ALL of Steorn's demos that actually turned, or flashed lights, or made scope traces... they all used batteries or mains power. As does their HEPHA-HEAT current kludge.
In short, this Orbo thread died because Steorn had nothing then, and has nothing now, that would honestly qualify as an "overunity" device. Their pulse motor of the third kind (core effect) -- the original Orbo -- is very interesting in its own right and will teach anyone who builds it a lot about pulse motors, the core effect, variable reluctance systems and so forth. Free energy? Look elsewhere, it's not to be found in Steorn's stories.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3JEUumq7tc
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3JEUumq7tc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3JEUumq7tc)
The author of this video should see this (http://www.overunity.com/8411/steorn-demo-live-stream-in-dublin-december-15th-10-am/msg360397/#msg360397).
I can't send him this link because I don't have a YouTube account to post comments.
P.S.
An expensive scope and gear but no soldering iron ?